I know that one of the major differences is that it provides buffered I/O
with local echo so it can greatly improve a remote terminal experience over
a high latency connection.
- Chris
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Ralph Mack <ralphm...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Chip Marshall <c...@2bithacker.net> writes:
> > Thought I'd share this: http://mosh.mit.edu/
> >
> > It's a remote terminal program (like SSH or telnet) but designed
> > to allow for mobility. Rather than sending the whole stream
> > across the network, it maintains a screen state on the remote
> > server (like screen) and syncs up the local display as needed.
> >
> > I've been using it for a few days now, and have been pretty
> > impressed, roaming seamlessly between wired and wireless
> > networks, between home and work, without losing my session has
> > been pretty nice.
>
> Does this differ dramatically from what graphical remote terminal
> sessions with backing X-terminals on the server effectively do? I'm
> thinking of programs like VNC. I've used several tools of that ilk to
> continue my session from different clients, i.e. several desktops at
> home, desktop at work, some other machine over lunch, etc. Of course,
> operating at the remote terminal level, mosh should be pretty lightweight,
> operate on various enigmatic alien devices, etc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gnhlug-discuss mailing list
> gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
> http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
>
_______________________________________________
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/
