Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for tunneling TCP/IP connections. #337

Merged
merged 4 commits into from May 8, 2019

Conversation

@liff
Copy link
Contributor

commented Jul 6, 2017

Can be used for connecting via jump servers, for example.

Should also solve #324 and #310 I believe.

It's rather simple but I'm not sure if the implementation in SocketClient is completely peachy. I'll gladly change it if there's a better approach.

liff added 2 commits Jul 6, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 6, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 6, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 6, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 6, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 6, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 6, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 29, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 29, 2017

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Jul 29, 2017

@liff

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Aug 26, 2017

@hierynomus any chance of this--or some variation--getting in?

@hierynomus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

commented Aug 28, 2017

@liff Thanks for reminding me. The reason this has not gone in yet is that I want to separate out the socket client from the ssh client. Like this has been done with SMBJ. It would then be very easy to add this functionality. You're welcome to take a stab at this. Have a look at what we did in SMBJ for the transport layer.

@ktham

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Oct 31, 2017

@hierynomus or @liff any updates on this PR? Let me know if there's anything I can help with, I'd like to be able to write some code that proxies through a jump server and am blocked on it

@MrGraversen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 1, 2017

+1 for this — I also need to go through a jump server and would love to switch from using a janky Bash script to something based in Java.

@liff

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

commented Nov 1, 2017

Sorry, haven't been able to yet muster up the courage to take a stab at the transport layer separation.

@NathanSweet

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jan 26, 2018

I would also love jump server support.

@kamtschatka

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jul 6, 2018

How about merging this fix first and separating the transport later afterwards? Seems like a lot of people want this and nothing has happened for a year.

@tom-smalls

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Nov 2, 2018

Hi all,

Is there any plans of merging this in?

@billstephens

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Jan 29, 2019

Bump. I just received a request for this feature.

@juddgaddie

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Feb 7, 2019

I also need this! Are there any major issues why it can't be merged?

@hierynomus

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Owner

commented Feb 13, 2019

Currently cleaning the PR up, there is some duplicate code now, Should be merged next week!

@codecov-io

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

commented Mar 1, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #337 into master will decrease coverage by 0.14%.
The diff coverage is 13.51%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##             master     #337      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     55.99%   55.85%   -0.15%     
- Complexity     1222     1226       +4     
============================================
  Files           192      193       +1     
  Lines          7899     7928      +29     
  Branches        716      717       +1     
============================================
+ Hits           4423     4428       +5     
- Misses         3124     3147      +23     
- Partials        352      353       +1
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
src/main/java/net/schmizz/sshj/SSHClient.java 57.83% <0%> (-0.46%) 33 <0> (+1)
...hj/connection/channel/direct/DirectConnection.java 0% <0%> (ø) 0 <0> (?)
src/main/java/net/schmizz/sshj/SocketClient.java 27% <21.73%> (-4.77%) 12 <6> (ø)
...zz/sshj/connection/channel/ChannelInputStream.java 76.11% <0%> (+2.98%) 16% <0%> (+1%) ⬆️
...t/schmizz/sshj/connection/ConnectionException.java 44.44% <0%> (+11.11%) 4% <0%> (+1%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f322a4b...0e784dd. Read the comment docs.

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Mar 1, 2019

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Mar 1, 2019

Repository owner deleted a comment from liff Mar 1, 2019

Repository owner deleted a comment from codacy-bot Mar 1, 2019

@hierynomus hierynomus merged commit 0e784dd into hierynomus:master May 8, 2019

3 of 5 checks passed

codecov/patch 13.51% of diff hit (target 55.99%)
Details
codecov/project 55.85% (-0.15%) compared to f322a4b
Details
Codacy/PR Quality Review Up to standards. A positive pull request.
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
security/snyk - build.gradle (hierynomus (GitHub marketplace)) No manifest changes detected
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
10 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.