shadowsocks / shadowsocks/shadowsocks-org
feature request: sip003 mux / multiplexing spec
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- HTML
- Stars
- 1k
- Forks
- 694
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
There is no relay in sip003, currenty it's implemented by plugin self.
- v2ray-plugin: use Mux.Cool
Mux.Coolcan be turned off by setmuxto0
As it's shadowsocks is based on socks, entire payload can be encrypted, so there is no mux solution on shadowsocks payload.
Then, the mux should be done on plugin:
- mux on payload, add mux header before payload
Mux.Cool- please note: it seems no way to compatible mux and non mux solution as mux header is not optional
- mux on plugin's underlying protocol
websocketsbased on http/1.1, use websockets's rsv and/or opcode.- please note, there should be some simple stream flow control
http2/http3, special stream and stream flow control- other: I don't think other protocol can be supported by cdn
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the SIP003 feature request and compare the approaches it lists: Mux.Cool, plugin-payload headers, WebSockets, HTTP/2, and HTTP/3. No implementation files or tests are named. Done would require an agreed multiplexing specification addressing compatibility, stream flow control, and supported underlying protocols.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- networking
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100