For anyone dealing with very shoddy connection, I'd highly recommend mosh: https://mosh.org
I used it when trying to use my iPad for minimalist development (mosh + ec2 + vim + Go) and it worked great compared to SSH.
I used it when trying to use my iPad for minimalist development (mosh + ec2 + vim + Go) and it worked great compared to SSH.
Mosh has more features than just handling unreliable connections though, so SSH over Wireguard is not a proper replacement. Mosh reduces input latency by just echoing text right away and fixing it if needed and only syncs the visible part of the screen instead of making output block while catching up. It does other interesting things too that I don't understand very well!
You can always run Mosh over Wireguard too! This is what I'm going to start doing I think.
https://github.com/mobile-shell/mosh/releases/tag/mosh-1.3.2...
If anyone here is more knowledgeable, it'd be good to know why it's been this long since an official release. It looks like most of the authors of mosh are academics, so my best guess is that mosh is a volunteer effort and it's just something that slipped through the cracks
Re: why has it been five years, I feel like I've written this message many times on HN (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28151637 , https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31010005), but here's another go. :-) We take Mosh's security seriously. In the ten years that Mosh has been out (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3819382), we've never had a real security hole -- that we know about. That's a fantastic (apparent) track record. I don't want us to boast about it because it's just tempting fate, and of course you never really know if you have a security hole (just the ones you find or people tell you about), but, in terms of "security holes discovered," Mosh's track record compares really well with OpenSSH, OpenSSL, etc. Of course those codebases (a) have a lot more features than Mosh, and do more than Mosh, and (b) release more often than Mosh, but I'm happy (and I think the rest of the team is too) that Mosh does the thing it does well and without having made our users vulnerable. Back in 2012 when Mosh first came out, with a novel C++ codebase, and a novel secure datagram protocol, a lot of people were skeptical that it was worth trusting, and I'm pretty happy with how things turned out. This was all before HeartBleed and before QUIC, when self-assured people told me to "use something vetted, like OpenSSL" instead of our own new protocol and codebase. It took a long time to earn the community's trust, and now there's a few million people using Mosh, and I don't want us to fuck that up.
I had handed off the project to another maintainer, and my understanding is that he had some health challenges or maybe just got burnt out. Given the choice between "release the code with lots of new features, but without the normal procedure and without an active maintainer to take responsibility for it" vs. "don't release," we chose the conservative option. I think that was the right choice. Of course many people equate "how recently was there a release" to "how secure is this software," and... I guess we are a counterexample? Not sure what else to say.
Thank you to HN and Patrick Collison for publicizing Mosh back when it first came out ten years ago (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3819382) and hope the next 10 years goes similarly... uneventfully and full of secure, reliable, mobile terminal sessions. :-) And thank you to all of you who get a chance to test the release candidate!
I did try tmux today. Also doesn't support mouse scrolling out of the box, but I did find the setting for it. Still screws with copy-paste and right clicking.
You might still use mosh if your connection is high latency and you are ok with occasional display artifacts, but its utility is much less if you already have tmux