Hacker news

  • Top
  • New
  • Past
  • Ask
  • Show
  • Jobs

Noq: n0's new QUIC implementation in Rust (https://www.iroh.computer)

246 points by od0 1 day ago | 37 comments | View on ycombinator

tekacs 1 day ago |

https://github.com/quinn-rs/quinn/issues/224#issuecomment-38...

It's lovely to see the polite and respectful back and forth in this comment thread where the Iroh folks are talking about deciding to fork. :)

agg23 1 day ago |

iroh seems like a very well positioned product in the era of people rapidly building applications for personal use. I'm really interested in seeing how they continue to grow.

I personally have been looking off and on at providing an "app relay" using it, where people can get an OSS, self-hostable (if desired), zero config way to remotely access their app/data on their network. This would be separate than a "network relay" (a la Tailscale), as this is done selectively as part of the application server and client, requires no knowledge or configuration as the user, and exposes a much smaller surface area.

adityamwagh 1 day ago |

Love the folks from n0. I regularly use their sendme cli for peer to peer file transfer!

Kazik24 1 day ago |

Excuse me if this is explained somewhere, but how does noq/iroh relays QUIC packets between peers? How does relay know which QUIC packets it receives should be sent where, since QUIC is famously hard to track? Do you stream to relay new/retire_connection_id packets through different connection so that it can link them to specific peers? Or is the relayed QUIC wrapped in different protocol?

dangoodmanUT 1 day ago |

The iroh team keeps cooking, unreal.

I’m excited to have a weekend to just sit down and tinker with iroh, it’s been on my list for a while. I want to make an overlay network like nebula with it

JumpingVPN2027 about 20 hours ago |

One thing I find interesting with QUIC and similar approaches is that they still bind connection continuity quite tightly to transport state.

I've been thinking about whether session identity could be separated entirely from transport, so that transport failure becomes a recoverable event rather than connection death.

Curious if anyone has seen practical systems that push this further than QUIC does.

Landing7610 about 23 hours ago |

even more interesting news from iroh that was annoounced recently: https://www.iroh.computer/blog/iroh-0-97-0-custom-transports...

baby 1 day ago |

have you guys checked nQUIC? Would be interesting to see Noise integrated in Noq as well :)

whatsakandr 1 day ago |

Not to be confused with https://github.com/tsoding/Noq

Which got it's name from 'Not Coq'

mrbluecoat 1 day ago |

> noq (”number 0 QUIC”)

Wouldn't that be n0q then?

jeffbee 1 day ago |

I was just reading the QUIC multipath RFC. Didn't it come out literally yesterday? I guess it's common to have the implementation foreshadowing the RFC but it's jarring to see them back to back like this.

superkuh 1 day ago |

Can this establish an QUIC connection without the other end having a CA cert? Or, like most other QUIC libs will it default to only allowing connections to corporation approved domains?

AiStockAgent62 1 day ago |

[dead]

ChrisSpoke68 1 day ago |

[dead]