Ask HN: Best modern file transfer/synchronization protocol? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Best modern file transfer/synchronization protocol?

70 pointsdaveidol58 comments

Hi HN,

I'm looking to build something to transfer files between two devices on a network (one client and one server, both of which are under my control).

Obviously I could write something bespoke with raw TCP sockets, but rather than reinventing the wheel I'm curious about what existing options people recommend. I assume there are some better technologies than FTP nowadays?

Ideally some kind of built-in fault tolerance would be great, because my plan is to use this on a phone/in an environment where the connection could be interrupted.

Edit: just to clarify - this is something I want to build into an application I am writing, ideally with support across iOS (client), Windows, and mac (server).

One way transfer is all I need, and I mostly plan on photos/videos (so multiple files ~3-20MB in size).

Thanks!

View on HN

No need to get fancy, scp or rsync are the tried and true options here.

Or on Windows, Xcopy.

Or robocopy.

Yes. It has many options - one of them being the capability of copying multiple files concurrently with the /MT switch.

robocopy is nice.

I use syncthing for this. It's a little fiddly to set up, and transfer speeds aren't great. However, it's very reliable once configured, and it barely uses any resources after an initial scan of the folder you want to sync.

I ended up with Syncthing after trying everything else (that O can self-host).

You can ease the eureka moment by remembering that each node is completely independent and decided what comes in, and suggests what goes out.

You can say that a folder is two way on a node and read only on another - and this is great because tout make decisions locally that allow you to build nice things.

The real issue is that you have to check on both sides of the pipe what is allowed.

It is very robust and good for LAN and remote sync (the traffic is outgoing to a relay server. Note that many of these relay servers are also TOR nudes so they can be flagged by your severity systems. You can always use your own)

https://iroh.computer/sendme

https://iroh.computer/

Iroh is what you’re looking for. You can embed into your code, and it handled wire encryption, verification, and NAT hole punching. All over QUIC.

iroh team member here. OP we’d be happy to help! https://iroh.computer/discord if you’d like to chat

I highly recommend Unison (https://github.com/bcpierce00/unison)

It allows you to sync between 2 machines (bi-directional) over TCP or SSH.

Note that TCP way is not encrypted, you may use wireguard as transport layer encryption for that purpose...

You can use an external application to copy if file size is larger than an arbitrary number. (Eg: use rsync for files > 1gb)

another vote for Unison, been using it for about a year for practically everything and it's great. takes a moment to grasp the concept, but it's 100% worth it.

that said, i haven't managed to set it up for my android phone yet - it's not available in termux and i have NO idea where to start if i'd like to package it myself. probably has to be done by someone who knows ocaml, since termux' environment is so different from normal linux.

unless... maybe i should give proot a shot (chroot in termux, lets you run something closer to linux). but it's another layer of complexity on top of everything....

seconding rsync and syncthing.

the server could expose an smb or nfs share, the client could mount it, and then sync to that mount.

rsync over ssh also works, if you do not want to run smb/nfs.

this is also a cool tool https://rclone.org/

I cannot recommend rclone enough. Been using it to transfer petabyte-scale datasets flawlessly. Available as librclone as well

rclone is no protocol though

it even has a decent Android client in F-droid, RCX. I just wish it supported SSHFS

RCX is approaching abandonware status (last release 2y ago). Round Sync is worth a look.

Thanks for the recommendation! I searched F-droid but found nothing, and then I realised it was probably.on Izzy

Or just use rclone from inside Termux.

Sure, but then it's not visible across the Android filesystem

rclone is garbage if you need performance or just copy between two points you control.

it shines when you need to sprinkle your data over many "clouds"

I'd argue the opposite. Rclone's parallelization options are unmatched.

why parellization matters if you are sending from/to points you control? that's usually from one machine's ssd to another's.

Because the transfer will happen faster if you're copying more than one file at a time.

So what do you use?

On a similar note, can someone tell me what's the fastest (wireless) way to transfer files between two laptops on same network (i.e. hotspot)?

scp, rsync, wormhole give me only 2-3 mb/s.

For the context, I'm trying to transfer about 50-70 GB files.

What's causing the bottleneck here and what am I missing? Thanks in advance!

https://github.com/magic-wormhole/magic-wormhole

Filezilla server + client is very fast and has a resume option

Are you transferring a large amount of small files?

No, it is a large zip file.

Are speed tests (e.g. speed.cloudflare.com) on both laptop also giving similar number?

If speed test result is much faster, the bottleneck could be the CPU incapable of encrypting/decrypting data fast enough using the default encryption method used by SCP/rsync. In that case, try unencrypted file transfer instead. Maybe just serve the file temporarily with `python -m http.server`

I shall check the speed on Cloudflare but the speed is not much improved on Python HTTP server too. :(

Then the issue might be in your wireless access point, maybe one of these:

- there is a max speed limit rule added to your access point to limit download/upload speed on one of your laptop. Remove them if you have access to the access point control panel, or use another access point

- the access point is overloaded, too many clients connected and its cpu can't keep up. Use another access point

- you are using 2.4Ghz band and it has a lot of interference in your area, try switching to 5Ghz or 6Ghz band if possible

- use adhoc transfer, directly connect to the other machine without using an access point: https://help.gnome.org/users/gnome-help/stable/net-wireless-...

Thank you! Shall check.

(Sorry for replying late, I forgot to check back for replies)

If it’s one way (that wasn’t quite clear from the requirements to me).

take a look at https://tus.io/

This is awesome! I am indeed looking for something one way - so this looks great. Thanks for sharing.

Yeah I usually just use rsync for this. In a loop if the network is unreliable.

I built something on top of the Syncthing API this week after using it on its own for years.

A local instance of Syncthing can behave as a robust sync tool + inotify API for applications consuming the files: https://docs.syncthing.net/rest/events-get.html#get-rest-eve...

i believe there's an embeddable golang library, but if you want something easy to use on android check in on syncthing-fork which lets you define more granular sync conditions including "just turn on 5 minutes every hour" https://github.com/Catfriend1/syncthing-android

What are your latency and bandwidth requirements? How big are the files? If you are already looking past obvious TCP-based choices like HTTP and FTP, you might be interested in FASP/Aspera https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fast_and_Secure_Protocol

Edit: I’ll leave it here just in case it is useful for others but it may or may not be embeddable into your app, especially on the phone.

I would probably start with rsync.

Thanks - is there a reference implementation for rsync that works on windows and iOS? My impression was it was more of a CLI tool for Linux/macOS.

For Windows: <https://community.chocolatey.org/packages/rsync>

If you are looking to integrate into another app, maybe check https://librsync.github.io/ out.

Unfortunately one of the caveats about what librsync is not (from the link):

librsync also does not include any network functions for talking to SSH or any other server. To access a remote filesystem, you need to provide your own code or make use of some other virtual filesystem layer.

Having this seems to be one of the primary requirements.

I did not read the OP that way: cross platform support, fault-tolerance and ability to integrate into a bespoke client/server solution (iow, there is already a network client and a server).

Even with that, librsync highlights that rsync is really a protocol rather than the CLI tool GP post referred to.

rsync over ssh for one-shots.

syncthing for continuous use.

I've starting using rclone over rsync for this application. Rclone can do segmented transfers and handles large numbers of files better, at least in my experience.

rclone is great! So useful as an alternative/superior client for cloud storage too (Google Drive, OneDrive, etc.)

What are segmented transfers?

Send multiple pieces of the file and reconstruct the file on the other end. It's more reliable to send smaller chunks and the transfer can be hash validated on individual chunks and after reconstruction. Multiple download streams typically performs better too (from single or multiple servers).

e.g. BitTorrent for the multiple servers case.

Grab an S3 bucket on amazon.

Do a 3 way sync with the s3 command line tool.

That way, you have a neat cloud backup as well. Wouldn't take any more than 20 minutes total to set up.

Respectfully disagree. You get charged 9 cents per GB after the first 100 GB xfer each month. This doesn't fit in well with the OP's environment, which is a LAN.

What about Jami? It runs almost everywhere and having an embeddable Jami library would be absolutely amazing, although a fair amount of work.

1. warpinator, syncthing 2. rclone??

3. self hosted ipfs in tailscale or something? (that would be cool)

continuous sync - mutagen.io (maybe you could extract some of the libraries)

depends on if it's large or small files.

rsync. If you are looking for a long term solution: zfs on both sides with zfs send.

eh... wget or curl ? or not modern enough for you?

Use HTTP. For fault tolerance, use resumeable downloads or resumeable uploads. There is work at the IETF on resumeable uploads right now: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-httpbis-resumabl...

I've had terrible experiences downloading large files over HTTP. I'm not sure why, range requests don't seem to be reliable or well supported. Something like BitTorrent is much better for large files: it divides the large file into chunks and hashes each chunk, and by default the chunks are downloaded in random order. BitTorrent seems much more reliable than range requests.

Same here. I downloaded some ~100Gb files, and everytime the connection broke, after relaunching, the shasum never matched. Even when the file size was exactly the same that the server reported.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com