Mosh is a truly impressive feat of thought and, perhaps more
importantly, engineering. The thinking behind Mosh is substantial, the
paradigms are fresh. Reading about mosh on its excellent website,
I <i>always</i> leave with a profound feeling of enthusiasm. Mosh belongs a
school of software development ethics that I'm sorely missing in the
world.<p>However, I do concur that, perhaps, Mosh solves a deep problem on the
wrong level or, even, in the wrong domain. The feeling, already
expressed here, that "tmux oughta do it" never leaves me. Why is that?<p>Because I know that ssh, by itsself, can handle connection loss quite
well[0]. Rather, I suspect, ssh can't deal with IP changes or the
destruction of the underlying interface.<p>So, here's the rub: Why is a stable, somehow-abstract, network interface
with a local IP, sitting on top of the actual network interfaces, be
they wired or wireless, <i>not</i> the answer? Over the years, on and off,
I tried to get the Linux ethernet bonding stack (ifenslave) to provide
me with just that solution, but was never able to.<p>Hence, I keep revisiting mosh, then revisiting ifenslave...<p>[0] On a machine that doesn't dynamically switch network interfaces on
demand, just unplug an ethernet cable, wait a while and plug it back
in: your ssh session will resume.