mirror of
https://github.com/sshuttle/sshuttle.git
synced 2024-11-22 07:53:43 +01:00
37 lines
1.9 KiB
ReStructuredText
37 lines
1.9 KiB
ReStructuredText
How it works
|
|
============
|
|
sshuttle is not exactly a VPN, and not exactly port forwarding. It's kind
|
|
of both, and kind of neither.
|
|
|
|
It's like a VPN, since it can forward every port on an entire network, not
|
|
just ports you specify. Conveniently, it lets you use the "real" IP
|
|
addresses of each host rather than faking port numbers on localhost.
|
|
|
|
On the other hand, the way it *works* is more like ssh port forwarding than
|
|
a VPN. Normally, a VPN forwards your data one packet at a time, and
|
|
doesn't care about individual connections; ie. it's "stateless" with respect
|
|
to the traffic. sshuttle is the opposite of stateless; it tracks every
|
|
single connection.
|
|
|
|
You could compare sshuttle to something like the old `Slirp
|
|
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slirp>`_ program, which was a userspace TCP/IP
|
|
implementation that did something similar. But it operated on a
|
|
packet-by-packet basis on the client side, reassembling the packets on the
|
|
server side. That worked okay back in the "real live serial port" days,
|
|
because serial ports had predictable latency and buffering.
|
|
|
|
But you can't safely just forward TCP packets over a TCP session (like ssh),
|
|
because TCP's performance depends fundamentally on packet loss; it
|
|
*must* experience packet loss in order to know when to slow down! At
|
|
the same time, the outer TCP session (ssh, in this case) is a reliable
|
|
transport, which means that what you forward through the tunnel *never*
|
|
experiences packet loss. The ssh session itself experiences packet loss, of
|
|
course, but TCP fixes it up and ssh (and thus you) never know the
|
|
difference. But neither does your inner TCP session, and extremely screwy
|
|
performance ensues.
|
|
|
|
sshuttle assembles the TCP stream locally, multiplexes it statefully over
|
|
an ssh session, and disassembles it back into packets at the other end. So
|
|
it never ends up doing TCP-over-TCP. It's just data-over-TCP, which is
|
|
safe.
|