glm-5.3-flash
a628715106
The root question is 'does wasm make sense for alksocks?', not 'how do we get wasm': Case 1 (wasm wanted) -> fork-first, PR as courtesy, carry regardless; Case 2 (wasm unwanted) -> plain dependency on the router.rs native path, no fork (the alkhttp precedent, strictly better when its premise holds). Decision inputs written: (a) is there a planned sandboxed (wasm) consumer of the SOCKS5 service, (b) is the fork genuinely minimal (POC #4 checks). Fork-first is a conditional preference, not a general one — do not carry a fork for an invariant's sake. AGENTS.md conventions 4/17 aligned.
693 lines
38 KiB
Markdown
693 lines
38 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
status: draft
|
|
last_updated: 2026-09-12
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# alksocks — Phase 0 (Exploration)
|
|
|
|
This document captures Phase 0 (Exploration) for the `alksocks` crate:
|
|
vision, guiding principles, prior art, open questions (OQ-SK-01..NN), and
|
|
POC candidates. Phase 0's objective per `docs/sdd_process.md`: *capture
|
|
vision and guiding principles; research options; validate approaches;
|
|
converge on a recommended approach.* It is the input to Phase 1
|
|
(Architecture), where the Architect will produce `docs/architecture/`
|
|
specs, ADRs, and the open-questions tracker.
|
|
|
|
Drafted 2026-09-12, emerging from the initial setup discussion. The crate
|
|
is the sibling of alktty (`alk/tty`) and alktunnels (`alk/tunnel`) on the
|
|
alkcall substrate; where alktunnels realizes the `-L`/`-R` forwarding
|
|
flavors, alksocks realizes the `-D` flavor (dynamic / SOCKS5 proxy) —
|
|
the one alktunnels explicitly deferred to composition.
|
|
|
|
## Vision and guiding principles
|
|
|
|
**One sentence:** a SOCKS5 (RFC 1928) producer/consumer protocol crate on
|
|
alkcall channels — an arbitrary-egress proxy service that never binds a
|
|
port unless explicitly configured to, wrapping `fast-socks5` so the RFC
|
|
conversation rides inside a channels data channel like any other produced
|
|
resource.
|
|
|
|
**The three components (2026-09-12 clarification — they serve different
|
|
purposes and were at risk of being conflated):**
|
|
|
|
1. **Producer half** — a side exposes the SOCKS5 service as a produced,
|
|
ACL-scoped resource (registers openable channels; the open handler
|
|
runs the RFC state machine; target dials happen there or further
|
|
downstream). This is the `-D` service over channels.
|
|
2. **Consumer half** — a side opens SOCKS5 channels against a produced
|
|
service and speaks RFC 1928 inside them. *Optionally* it may expose
|
|
the service locally: bind a real `socks5://127.0.0.1:port` endpoint
|
|
and relay each accepted connection into a channel (the ssh `-D`
|
|
local-exposure shape, and the path tun2proxy/curl/browser point at).
|
|
3. **SOCKS client wrapper for QUIC runtimes** — `AsyncUdpSocket`
|
|
implementations (quinn and noq) so downstream clients (alknet) can
|
|
route QUIC through *any* third-party SOCKS5 server — not just one
|
|
produced by this crate. The motivating case is iroh's privacy
|
|
posture: iroh relays see the real IP (intended for relay-assisted
|
|
p2p), and a client that doesn't want to leak it needs a SOCKS hop
|
|
ahead of the QUIC dial. This component is a plain client library
|
|
(the alknet ADR-090 descendant); it neither produces nor consumes
|
|
channels.
|
|
|
|
Components 1+2 form the producer/consumer protocol pair (channels in,
|
|
RFC 1928 inside); component 3 is standalone and composes with any
|
|
RFC 1928 server. Keep them structurally separate in the crate layout.
|
|
|
|
Guiding principles, inherited from the alk* family:
|
|
|
|
1. **"ALPN as a service," not "a server."** The SOCKS5 service is a
|
|
produced, ACL-scoped resource on a channels connection — the same
|
|
shape as an alktty terminal or an alktunnels TCP tunnel. Kernel
|
|
binds exist only as explicit, optional assembly-layer shapes on
|
|
*either side* — the producer may serve from a real listener (a
|
|
feature-gated local backend, component 1's optional shape), and the
|
|
consumer may expose the resource on a local port (component 2's
|
|
optional shape, the ssh `-D` front door). The protocol itself never
|
|
binds; the binding decision belongs to the caller.
|
|
2. **The `-D` conclusion, realized.** alktunnels' Phase 0 settled that
|
|
`-D` composes at the assembly layer: "`-D` is just tunnel a socks5
|
|
connection"; target selection lives in the SOCKS5 protocol at the
|
|
producing side, governed by the same op-level ACL as the resource.
|
|
This crate is that conclusion's realization as a first-class protocol
|
|
crate, not an assembly-layer afterthought.
|
|
3. **Wrap `fast-socks5`, preserve its genericity.** `fast-socks5`'s
|
|
explicit typestate server API (`Socks5ServerProtocol<T, states::*>`)
|
|
is generic over `T: AsyncRead + AsyncWrite + Unpin`, and its
|
|
interception points (`run_tcp_proxy`, `run_udp_proxy_custom`,
|
|
`transfer`) accept any such `T`. The channels adapter feeds the state
|
|
machine a `BiStream`; a local backend feeds it a `TcpStream`. The
|
|
wrapper must not leak either substrate into the protocol layer
|
|
(alktty `TtyBackend` / alktunnels pump-halves inversion-point
|
|
precedent).
|
|
4. **Producer/consumer vocabulary.** Both sides of a channels connection
|
|
can initiate; a producer registers openable SOCKS5 channels
|
|
(`ChannelCore::register_openable`), a consumer opens them and speaks
|
|
RFC 1928 inside. RFC 1928's own client/server roles keep their RFC
|
|
names *inside* the protocol layer, but crate-level docs and API use
|
|
producer/consumer. Avoid "SOCKS5 server" as a crate-level noun.
|
|
5. **Extract-and-improve from alknet.** alknet's SOCKS5 story is the
|
|
direct ancestor: the client side (`alknet-client/src/socks5.rs`,
|
|
ADR-090 — `Socks5UdpSocket` implements `quinn::AsyncUdpSocket` so
|
|
QUIC rides UDP ASSOCIATE, validated by the quinn-proxy POC) and the
|
|
server side (the `-D` capability alktunnels deferred). This crate
|
|
rehomes both halves behind one protocol crate and improves them.
|
|
6. **The vpn-like endgame composition.** A SOCKS5 server + tun2proxy is
|
|
the last step (ish) of "vpn-like without actually being a vpn": a
|
|
user tunnels a produced SOCKS5 resource to a local port (component
|
|
2's optional shape), then points tun2proxy (`/workspace/tun2proxy`
|
|
— it takes `--proxy socks5://user:pass@host:port` natively,
|
|
`src/args.rs`) at it, and the whole host's traffic rides the alk*
|
|
egress. This crate is the SOCKS5 leg of that composition; alktunnels
|
|
carries the tunnel; tun2proxy closes the loop. (The udpgw framing
|
|
alktunnels' UDP format is based on is the same prior art
|
|
OQ-SK-03's datagram codec draws on.)
|
|
|
|
## What is already settled
|
|
|
|
The foundation is POC-validated and ADR-pinned upstream; this crate does
|
|
not start from zero. It inherits:
|
|
|
|
- **The channels data path** — demux→Connection→handler→mux, validated
|
|
by the alknet-channels POC and production alktty/alktunnels. The SOCKS5
|
|
payload is raw bytes inside a channels data channel's `BiStream`;
|
|
channels strips its 8-byte header transparently (alknet ADR-093 /
|
|
alkcall ADR-035). SOCKS5 CONNECT is one `BiStream` per session — the
|
|
RFC conversation *is* the stream; no sub-demux, no framing, no flow
|
|
key (one channel per SOCKS5 session).
|
|
- **The two-pump data plane** — the CONNECT proxy loop is the canonical
|
|
two-pump shape; `alkcall::channels::pump_bidi` (ADR-050) is pinned
|
|
upstream and alktunnels-validated. Use it; do not hand-roll.
|
|
- **The establishment story** — session opens use
|
|
`register_openable_with_establisher` (alkcall ADR-049 + amendment 2):
|
|
the establisher runs as an awaited, bounded establishment phase; a
|
|
refused session is a typed `channel:open_failed` call error
|
|
(`reason ∈ dial_failed / unknown_resource / resource_shortage /
|
|
handler_error / timeout`), never a phantom channel. The negotiate/
|
|
auth half of the RFC conversation still runs in-stream over the
|
|
`BiStream` — establishment covers only the producer's accept policy,
|
|
not the RFC handshake.
|
|
- **The producer/consumer model** — producer registers openable channels
|
|
(authorization for free via `AccessControl`); consumer opens them via
|
|
`ChannelClient` (alkcall ADR-037, ADR-043). Connection direction is
|
|
independent of service direction.
|
|
- **The relay/hub story** — a SOCKS5 resource traverses alkcall hub
|
|
relays like any produced resource; the hub's terminate-and-re-produce
|
|
proxy (alktunnels' refinement of alkcall ADR-042) applies per hop, and
|
|
a SOCKS5 resource is exactly the "further downstream" shape alktunnels
|
|
described. No socks5-specific relay work.
|
|
- **The identity seam** — alkcall 0.7.0's CF-005/CF-006: the per-call
|
|
opener identity arrives on the open-op hooks. Auth mapping (identity →
|
|
SOCKS5 credentials/ACL, if any) happens there, not via in-band SOCKS
|
|
auth, unless RFC-facing username/password is needed for vanilla SOCKS5
|
|
clients (OQ-SK-02).
|
|
- **The backend inversion point pattern** — substrate-specific types
|
|
confined to feature-gated backend modules, injected at the assembly
|
|
layer (alktty `TtyBackend` / alktunnels no-trait precedent).
|
|
- **The wasm-clean default crate** — protocol-only code should compile
|
|
to `wasm32-unknown-unknown` (alktty/alktunnels precedent). Caveat:
|
|
`fast-socks5` itself is not yet known to be wasm-clean (OQ-SK-04).
|
|
|
|
## Prior art
|
|
|
|
### alktunnels Phase 0 — the closest sibling
|
|
|
|
`/workspace/@alkdev/alktunnels/docs/research/phase-0-findings.md`. The
|
|
load-bearing conclusions this crate inherits:
|
|
|
|
- **Hub-owns-the-connection model** — role follows the resource;
|
|
whoever can reach the target is the producer, whoever wants the bytes
|
|
is the consumer. The "exposed port" is a virtual, ACL-scoped resource,
|
|
not a bind. For alksocks: the producer is the side that dials targets
|
|
(the egress side); the consumer is the side that wants proxied
|
|
egress. "A SOCKS5 service is the same shape [as a produced tunnel
|
|
resource], further downstream" is alktunnels' own wording — this
|
|
crate exists to make it literal.
|
|
- **`-D` composes at the assembly layer** — the original half-answer,
|
|
now with the mechanism named: a SOCKS5 server at some assembly layer
|
|
is just a consumer opening channels with per-connection dynamic
|
|
targets. The refinement this crate adds: the SOCKS5 *service* is
|
|
itself a produced resource (producer half), so a vanilla SOCKS5 client
|
|
(curl, a browser, ssh -D's own client half) can attach through the
|
|
optional local backend, and channels-native consumers get the same
|
|
service in-band. Both halves wrap the same protocol layer.
|
|
- **Target policy = resource policy.** alktunnels OQ-TN-08 dissolved
|
|
dynamic-target policy: whatever ACL governs the socks5 resource
|
|
governs everything reachable through it, plus whatever policy the
|
|
SOCKS5 implementation itself applies downstream. No target allowlists
|
|
in the base crate unless Phase 1 wants them (OQ-SK-05).
|
|
- **The codec conclusion does NOT transfer.** alktunnels needed
|
|
length-framing only for datagram substrates; a SOCKS5 CONNECT session
|
|
is a byte stream end to end (RFC 1928 defines its own framing on the
|
|
wire) — the channel payload is pure pass-through, 0 B overhead over
|
|
the channels 8-byte header. UDP ASSOCIATE's datagram stage is the
|
|
exception (OQ-SK-03).
|
|
|
|
### fast-socks5 — the implementation to wrap
|
|
|
|
`/workspace/fast-socks5` (v1.0.0, MIT, we own upstream). Read the source
|
|
before designing against it. Key surface points, verified:
|
|
|
|
- **Explicit typestate server API** (`src/server.rs`):
|
|
`Socks5ServerProtocol<T, states::Opened|Authenticated|CommandRead>`,
|
|
generic over `T: AsyncRead + AsyncWrite + Unpin`. Flow:
|
|
`start(inner)` → `negotiate_auth(&methods)` →
|
|
`finish_auth()` / `accept_no_auth` / `accept_password_auth` →
|
|
`read_command()` → (`reply_success`, `reply_error`). The legacy
|
|
`Socks5Server`/`Socks5Socket`/`Incoming` API (binds a `TcpListener`)
|
|
is deprecated — the wrapper uses the explicit API only.
|
|
- **Auth surface** — the `AuthMethod<T>` trait (metadata: `method_id`,
|
|
`new`) + `AuthMethodSuccessState<T>` (carry the socket back out);
|
|
`StandardAuthentication` enum for NoAuth + Password with static
|
|
dispatch; custom methods implement the trait. Username/password check
|
|
is a closure (`accept_password_auth`). The auth *decision* is where
|
|
the alkcall identity seam plugs in (OQ-SK-02).
|
|
- **Command handling is swappable** — the interception points:
|
|
- `run_tcp_proxy(proto, addr, timeout, nodelay)` — dials, replies,
|
|
then `transfer(inbound, outbound)` (a `copy_bidirectional` wrapper,
|
|
itself generic). This is where a channels-native dial replaces the
|
|
`tokio::net` dial: the wrapper's producer half intercepts here,
|
|
dials via alktunnels/alkcall primitives (or its own dial policy),
|
|
and returns the `T` back.
|
|
- `run_udp_proxy_custom(proto, addr, peer_bind_ip, reply_ip, transfer)`
|
|
— the customizable UDP ASSOCIATE handler: the wrapper supplies a
|
|
custom `transfer` closure that owns the relay half (OQ-SK-03).
|
|
- `transfer(inbound, outbound)` — plain two-pump copy; a channels
|
|
`BiStream` is a legal `T` on either side.
|
|
- **UDP support** — `new_udp_header(target)` / `parse_udp_request(buf)`
|
|
are public and pure (no socket I/O) — the SOCKS5 UDP datagram header
|
|
codec is reusable without the `Socket2`-based relay machinery. The
|
|
default `run_udp_proxy` binds two kernel sockets (`Socket2`, random
|
|
ports) — the *binds are in the default handler, not in the protocol*,
|
|
which is exactly the seam the no-bind requirement needs.
|
|
- **Client side** — `Socks5Stream<S>` (generic over the backing socket;
|
|
`use_stream` upgrades any `AsyncRead + AsyncWrite + Unpin` already
|
|
connected) and `Socks5Datagram<S>` (UDP associate; also accepts a
|
|
caller-supplied socket via `use_socket`). `Socks5Stream` impls
|
|
`AsyncRead + AsyncWrite` itself, so a consumer session over a
|
|
channels `BiStream` is the intended use, not a hack. Note:
|
|
`Socks5Stream::connect` convenience constructors dial
|
|
`tokio::net::TcpStream` and are non-wasm; `use_stream` is the
|
|
substrate-free path.
|
|
- **Error surface** — `ReplyError` (the RFC reply codes, `as_u8`/
|
|
`from_u8`) and `SocksError`; `SocksServerError` on the explicit API.
|
|
Map these faithfully; never collapse a refusal into a generic error.
|
|
- **`router.rs` example** — the "conditional interception" template: a
|
|
server that inspects the command/target, then decides whether to
|
|
proxy, refuse, or handle in-process. Structurally the shape of the
|
|
channels open handler (inspect params → dial or refuse) and of the
|
|
alknet ADR-090 client (hand the established stream to quinn).
|
|
|
|
### alknet's SOCKS5 client + the quinn-proxy POC — the client-side ancestor
|
|
|
|
`/workspace/@alkdev/alknet/crates/alknet-client/src/socks5.rs` (ADR-090)
|
|
implements `Socks5UdpSocket: quinn::AsyncUdpSocket` — a SOCKS5 UDP
|
|
ASSOCIATE tunnel wrapped as the socket QUIC polls. The quinn-proxy POC
|
|
(`/workspace/@alkdev/alknet/docs/research/quinn-quic-proxy/findings.md`)
|
|
validated the approach end-to-end (5/5 clean runs) against quinn 0.11:
|
|
one public trait (`AsyncUdpSocket`), one public constructor
|
|
(`Endpoint::new_with_abstract_socket`), no fork. Known limitations
|
|
there, likely inherited: ECN is lost through the SOCKS5 header; the
|
|
proxy must support UDP ASSOCIATE; `may_fragment() == true` disables
|
|
path MTU discovery.
|
|
|
|
This crate's client half rehomes that work (cleaned up, `ClientDialError`
|
|
→ thiserror types, and the datagram codec sourced from fast-socks5
|
|
rather than hand-rolled inline). The open question is noq (OQ-SK-06).
|
|
|
|
### noq — the quinn fork the client story must also fit
|
|
|
|
`/workspace/noq` (v1.2.0; iroh's fork of quinn — iroh depends on
|
|
`noq = "1.2.0"`). Surface verified:
|
|
|
|
- `noq::AsyncUdpSocket` exists (`noq/src/runtime/mod.rs:44`) but with a
|
|
**different shape** than quinn 0.11: `create_io_poller` +
|
|
`try_send` are replaced by `create_sender() -> Pin<Box<dyn UdpSender>>`
|
|
with `poll_send(transmit, cx)` — a sender-object split (any number of
|
|
`UdpSender`s per socket, each holding its own waker).
|
|
- `RecvMeta` gained fields (`interface_index`, `timestamp`) but stays
|
|
default-constructible; `Transmit` is unchanged in the fields the
|
|
SOCKS5 wrapper touches (`destination`, `contents`, `ecn`, `src_ip`,
|
|
`segment_size`).
|
|
- `Endpoint::new_with_abstract_socket` exists (`noq/src/endpoint.rs:162`)
|
|
with the same doc-comment intent, but takes
|
|
`Box<dyn AsyncUdpSocket>` rather than `Arc<dyn AsyncUdpSocket>` — the
|
|
poller-removal reshuffle also changed the ownership shape.
|
|
- The alknet `Socks5UdpSocket` does **not** drop in unchanged: the impl
|
|
must be rewritten against `create_sender`/`poll_send`, and the
|
|
`Arc`→`Box` change ripples into construction. Whether one crate can
|
|
serve both quinn and noq behind feature flags (shared core, two thin
|
|
trait-impl shells) or whether the shapes have diverged enough to
|
|
justify two impls is the research question (OQ-SK-06). iroh's own
|
|
adoption makes noq support the practically-important target.
|
|
|
|
### Anti-prior-art (what NOT to carry over)
|
|
|
|
- **The alknet client's hand-rolled SOCKS5 codec** —
|
|
`socks5.rs` inlines the greeting/auth/CONNECT/ASSOCIATE byte logic
|
|
twice (handshake for UDP, again for CONNECT). fast-socks5's client
|
|
types and `new_udp_header`/`parse_udp_request` supersede it; the
|
|
wrapper should not vendor a second codec.
|
|
- **`Socks5Server` (the legacy bind-based API)** — deprecated upstream;
|
|
never the default path here.
|
|
- **In-band SOCKS auth as the primary auth story** — alkcall's identity
|
|
seam (CF-005/CF-006) authorizes at the open-op layer. In-band RFC
|
|
username/password remains available only for vanilla-client
|
|
compatibility (OQ-SK-02).
|
|
|
|
## Open Questions
|
|
|
|
These are the design questions Phase 0 must resolve (or explicitly
|
|
defer) before the architecture spec. Numbered OQ-SK-01.. so they can be
|
|
referenced, tracked, and promoted into `docs/architecture/
|
|
open-questions.md` in Phase 1. Half-answers and hunches are marked as
|
|
such — the point of this document is to hold them without forcing
|
|
premature decisions.
|
|
|
|
### OQ-SK-01: Producer dial policy — what dials the target?
|
|
|
|
When the producer's SOCKS5 state machine reads a CONNECT command, the
|
|
target dial must happen *somewhere*. Options:
|
|
|
|
- **Option A: dial via alktunnels** — the producer composes with a
|
|
local alktunnels consumer: the SOCKS5 handler opens an `alk/tunnel`
|
|
channel naming the target, and the two-pump data plane is
|
|
tunnel-channel ↔ SOCKS5-`BiStream`. Maximum composition ("further
|
|
downstream" made literal), but adds a runtime dependency and a hop.
|
|
- **Option B: dial directly** — the producer dials the target itself
|
|
(`TcpStream` behind the `local` feature, or an injected dial
|
|
callback). No alktunnels dependency; the dial policy (allowlists,
|
|
routing through another alksocks hop) is the caller's callback.
|
|
- **Option C: injected dialer trait** — a `Dialer`-shaped trait
|
|
(`async fn dial(target) -> impl AsyncRead + AsyncWrite`) with
|
|
alktunnels and local-TCP implementations behind features. Middle
|
|
ground; the trait is a backend-inversion-point decision (compare
|
|
alktunnels OQ-TN-05's resolution: *no trait*, a function producing
|
|
boxed halves sufficed).
|
|
|
|
Considerations: substrate-agnostic-by-construction (AGENTS.md
|
|
convention 7) favors injection over hardwiring; the "hub terminates and
|
|
re-produces" story means a hub-hop SOCKS5 resource's dialer is just
|
|
"open a channel further downstream," which is Option A's shape — so
|
|
whatever is decided must not *prevent* A when composing. Hunch: a dial
|
|
callback/trait at the protocol layer, with alktunnels and local-TCP
|
|
providers feature-gated — but alktunnels' no-trait precedent warns
|
|
against a trait unless two real implementations converge; decide with
|
|
the Phase 1 spec.
|
|
|
|
### OQ-SK-02: Auth mapping — identity seam vs in-band SOCKS auth
|
|
|
|
The producer's open-op hooks receive the per-call opener identity
|
|
(alkcall CF-005/CF-006). The SOCKS5 RFC conversation also carries its
|
|
own optional username/password auth (RFC 1929). Questions:
|
|
|
|
- Is the identity seam the *only* auth story (the open op is
|
|
authorized; the in-band handshake is skipped via
|
|
`skip_auth_this_is_not_rfc_compliant` or a no-op NoAuth), with
|
|
RFC-facing username/password available only for the optional local
|
|
backend (where vanilla SOCKS5 clients connect)?
|
|
- If both exist, how do they compose — does in-band auth *replace* the
|
|
channel identity for target-policy purposes, or is it a second gate?
|
|
- Does the wrapper need a fast-socks5 `AuthMethod` implementation that
|
|
consults the alkcall `AuthContext`/`Identity` (filed upstream if the
|
|
hook shape doesn't fit — AGENTS.md convention 17)?
|
|
|
|
Hunch: identity-at-the-open-op is the primary gate for
|
|
channels-native consumers; in-band username/password exists for the
|
|
local-backend path only. Needs a decision (and possibly an upstream
|
|
ask) in Phase 1.
|
|
|
|
### OQ-SK-03: UDP ASSOCIATE without binding — the hard case
|
|
|
|
RFC 1928 §7: the client sends UDP ASSOCIATE over the TCP control
|
|
connection; the server replies with a UDP relay address (`BND.ADDR`/
|
|
`BND.PORT`); the client then sends UDP datagrams (SOCKS5 UDP header +
|
|
payload) *to that address*. On channels there is no UDP relay socket —
|
|
the datagram stage must ride a channel. Sub-questions:
|
|
|
|
- **Where does the datagram stage live?** Options:
|
|
- **Same channel, extended protocol** — after ASSOCIATE, the channel's
|
|
`BiStream` carries length-prefixed datagrams (the alktunnels UDP
|
|
codec shape, `[len: u16 BE]` per datagram; 65507 < 65535 so u16
|
|
suffices). The reply to the client rewrites `BND.ADDR`/`BND.PORT`
|
|
to a sentinel that means "same channel" — but vanilla SOCKS5
|
|
clients will literally `sendto()` that address, so this shape only
|
|
works for *wrapper-aware* client halves (the crate's own consumer
|
|
session, or an assembly layer bridging a real UDP socket).
|
|
- **Second channel for the datagram stage** — the producer
|
|
establishes the association on channel 1, then the client opens a
|
|
second channel that becomes the relay. Keeps CONNECT-shaped
|
|
`BiStream` semantics clean but adds an open-op round trip and
|
|
needs correlation (params carry the association id?).
|
|
- **Local-backend bridge only** — UDP ASSOCIATE is offered only
|
|
through the optional local backend (which binds a real UDP relay
|
|
socket as the assembly layer's explicit choice), never
|
|
channels-natively. Simplest; weakens the "ALPN as a service"
|
|
story for UDP.
|
|
- **What does `BND.ADDR`/`BND.PORT` reply contain on the channels
|
|
path?** RFC says the relay address; a channels path has none.
|
|
fast-socks5's `run_udp_proxy_custom` lets the wrapper supply the
|
|
reply and the relay half — the seam exists upstream; the semantics
|
|
are ours to define.
|
|
- **Per-datagram addressing** — the SOCKS5 UDP header carries the
|
|
destination per datagram (ATYP + addr + port), so one association
|
|
multiplexes many endpoints: per-endpoint flow table producer-side
|
|
(the alknet `Socks5UdpSocket` model, and the udpgw prior art
|
|
alktunnels documented). Boundary preservation is mandatory (empty
|
|
datagram ≠ EOF — alktunnels F-2's lesson transfers directly).
|
|
- **Do vanilla (wrapper-unaware) clients need channels-native UDP at
|
|
all?** If the only UDP ASSOCIATE consumers are wrapper-aware, the
|
|
sentinel-reply shape is fine and no virtualized relay address is
|
|
ever invented.
|
|
|
|
**Phase model vs alktty-style demux (2026-09-12 discussion).** An
|
|
alternative shape surfaced: alktty's logical demux (input/output/error/
|
|
control sub-streams inside one channel, type byte per chunk, up to the
|
|
u8 = 255 stream-type limit) applied to the SOCKS5 channel — a `data`
|
|
stream and a `udp-relay` stream type would carry the two phases
|
|
structurally. Analysis against RFC 1928's actual structure: **RFC 1928
|
|
is one command per connection, and control and data never interleave in
|
|
either direction.** CONNECT's control conversation ends at the reply,
|
|
after which the channel is a pure byte stream (alktunnels' 0 B
|
|
pass-through conclusion); ASSOCIATE's control stream goes silent after
|
|
the reply — fast-socks5's own `wait_on_tcp` (`src/server.rs:1195`)
|
|
treats any post-reply control byte as protocol garbage
|
|
(`UnexpectedUdpControlGarbage`). So the per-chunk type byte demuxes a
|
|
problem SOCKS5 doesn't have; a **phase model** (raw RFC conversation
|
|
until the reply, then a mode switch synchronized by the reply itself —
|
|
pass-through for CONNECT, `[len: u16 BE]` datagrams for ASSOCIATE)
|
|
subsumes it with no type byte and no sentinel address: wrapper-aware
|
|
clients know "post-reply = datagram mode," the same way they'd know
|
|
"relay stream = datagram mode" under the demux. What the demux genuinely
|
|
buys that the phase model does not: an **additive in-band vocabulary** —
|
|
new stream types extend the wire additively (no format break), whereas
|
|
adding a post-reply phase later is a wire break. alktunnels accepted the
|
|
opposite ("no in-band control path, ever — the escape hatch is a new
|
|
ALPN, a wire change is not"); the demux reintroduces that vocabulary at
|
|
2 B/chunk (type byte + length prefix) on every datagram. The one-way-door
|
|
cost is real either way: demux bakes the vocabulary in before it has a
|
|
user; phase model keeps 0 B overhead on CONNECT and 2 B on ASSOCIATE
|
|
datagrams. Hunch: phase model (simpler, RFC-shaped); the extensibility
|
|
argument is the honest case for the demux if Phase 1 wants the
|
|
vocabulary. Decide via ADR with the first consumer in sight.
|
|
|
|
Hunch (datagram stage, unchanged): wrapper-aware client halves ride the
|
|
same-channel length-prefixed-datagram shape; vanilla clients get UDP
|
|
ASSOCIATE only via the optional local backend. But this is the crate's
|
|
largest unknown — a POC candidate (OQ-SK-07 #2), decided by an ADR
|
|
before the first consumer (the datagram framing is wire-stable once
|
|
published).
|
|
|
|
### OQ-SK-04: fast-socks5 wasm posture (blocks the wasm-clean invariant)
|
|
|
|
`fast-socks5` uses `tokio::net` (`TcpListener`, `TcpStream`,
|
|
`UdpSocket`) and `socket2` unconditionally (`Cargo.toml`: tokio features
|
|
`io-util, net, time, macros`; deps `socket2 = "0.5.8"`); `wasm32-
|
|
unknown-unknown` has no `tokio::net`. The wrapper's own protocol layer
|
|
can stay wasm-clean (the typestate API is generic over `T`), but
|
|
depending on the crate at all may break `cargo check --target
|
|
wasm32-unknown-unknown` at the dependency-graph level.
|
|
|
|
**The decision tree (2026-09-12 clarification — two main forks, and the
|
|
preference between them is conditional):**
|
|
|
|
- **Case 1: wasm matters for this crate → fork-first.** Make the
|
|
minimal fork and use it — offer it upstream as a PR (merge if they
|
|
want it; we carry the fork regardless; never wait on approval).
|
|
The gating change is genuinely small (feature-gate
|
|
`tokio::net`/`socket2` behind a default-on `net` feature, per the
|
|
alktty `local` pattern); the long-term cost of maintaining a
|
|
minimal fork of a well-written lib trends toward zero. Concretely
|
|
"fork" likely means **vendoring the relevant subset into this
|
|
crate** (the codecs, typestate machinery, client `use_stream` path —
|
|
the parts that are already `T`-generic) and gating the native-net
|
|
pieces behind the crate's own `local` feature, rather than
|
|
publishing a divergent crate. fast-socks5 remains the reference
|
|
checkout for differential testing of RFC edge cases (reply-code
|
|
mapping, domain addressing, fragmentation) and the PR source; if
|
|
upstream accepts the PR, the fork shrinks to a plain dependency.
|
|
- **Case 2: wasm doesn't matter for this crate → plain dependency, no
|
|
fork.** Ride the `router.rs` native path exactly as-is (the
|
|
alkhttp precedent — a crate in this suite can ship native-only).
|
|
This is strictly better *if its premise holds*: no fork burden, no
|
|
vendoring, upstream stays upstream. The alkhttp contrast is
|
|
instructive — alkhttp's substance (axum/hyper/reqwest) is
|
|
socket-native, so nobody misses wasm there.
|
|
|
|
**The root question is therefore: does wasm make sense for alksocks?**
|
|
Not "how do we get wasm" — that is Case 1's solved problem. Analysis
|
|
for the decision:
|
|
|
|
- **What wasm would serve:** the protocol layer (components 1+2 of the
|
|
three-component split, §Vision) in a sandboxed adapter — the
|
|
alktty/alktunnels posture that a wasm-compiled protocol crate is the
|
|
protocol layer for downstream TS/Python adapters. The natural wasm
|
|
shape is a **consumer**: speak RFC 1928 client-side over a channels
|
|
`BiStream` (pure byte framing; the producer dials targets, so no
|
|
local sockets are needed on the client side). A wasm **producer** is
|
|
odd standalone (no kernel egress) but composes — its dialer can open
|
|
alktunnels channels further downstream, which is the hub story.
|
|
- **What wasm would not serve:** component 3 (the quinn/noq client
|
|
wrapper) is native-only in practice — it wraps kernel UDP sockets for
|
|
UDP ASSOCIATE; no wasm story is expected there regardless.
|
|
- **The alkhttp contrast, honestly weighed:** for alkhttp,
|
|
"an HTTP client accessed over a channel" was judged weird, and the
|
|
crate ships native-only. alksocks differs structurally: its protocol
|
|
substance *is* byte-framing over a generic `T` — the part that costs
|
|
nothing to keep wasm-clean. But "costs nothing under the fork" is
|
|
only an argument once Case 1 is chosen; it is not itself the use
|
|
case. The use case is a planned sandboxed SOCKS consumer.
|
|
|
|
**Decision inputs (what actually settles Case 1 vs Case 2):**
|
|
|
|
1. **Is there a planned sandboxed (wasm) consumer of the SOCKS5
|
|
service?** If the downstream TS/Python adapter story includes a
|
|
channels-connected sandbox that wants proxied egress, wasm matters
|
|
→ Case 1. If not → Case 2.
|
|
2. **Is the fork genuinely minimal?** POC #4 (OQ-SK-07) verifies
|
|
empirically how invasive the gating is. If the gating turns out
|
|
structural (the `T`-generic surface can't be separated from
|
|
`tokio::net` without a rewrite), the fork cost rises and Case 2
|
|
gains weight — reimplementing the protocol to serve a wasm story
|
|
nobody has yet defeats the purpose.
|
|
|
|
Both inputs point the same way when aligned: fork-first in Case 1 is
|
|
the preferred branch *because* wasm is wanted there — not as a general
|
|
preference for forks over upstream asks. If the adapter story never
|
|
materializes, Case 2 (plain dep, router path) is the obvious choice,
|
|
and no one should carry a fork for an invariant's sake.
|
|
|
|
### OQ-SK-05: Target policy and egress scoping
|
|
|
|
SOCKS5 is arbitrary-egress by nature — the open gate plus the target
|
|
policy are the security boundary (AGENTS.md convention 12). alktunnels
|
|
resolved that whatever ACL governs the socks5 resource governs
|
|
everything reachable through it; OQ-SK-01's dial policy is the
|
|
mechanism. Residual questions for Phase 1:
|
|
|
|
- Does the base crate ship a per-target allowlist hook (producer-side
|
|
policy injected at registration), or is target policy entirely the
|
|
dialer's concern (the dial callback refuses)? The dialer-refuses
|
|
shape avoids a second policy layer (alktunnels' resolution pattern);
|
|
the allowlist-hook shape makes a common policy declarative.
|
|
- Is there a `SOCKS5_OPEN_SCOPE` (scope-gate on the open op, alktty
|
|
`TTY_OPEN_SCOPE` shape) — presumably yes, but the exact scope-string
|
|
convention should follow alkcall's registry conventions.
|
|
- Domain-form targets (RFC 1928 ATYP 0x03): resolve producer-side
|
|
(fast-socks5's `dns_resolve` config), refuse, or pass through to the
|
|
dialer unresolved? (DNS-on-the-producer is the SSH `-D` semantic;
|
|
wasm producers may not have a resolver at all — another OQ-SK-04
|
|
interaction.)
|
|
|
|
### OQ-SK-06: noq client support (and the quinn/noq shape split)
|
|
|
|
**Scope clarification (2026-09-12):** the SOCKS client wrapper is
|
|
component 3 of the three-component split (§Vision) — a standalone
|
|
client library for downstream users (alknet) that must work with *any*
|
|
RFC 1928 server, not just one this crate produces. The motivating case
|
|
is iroh's privacy posture: iroh relays (and the peer) see the client's
|
|
real IP — intended for relay-assisted p2p, but a client that doesn't
|
|
want to leak its IP needs a SOCKS hop ahead of the QUIC dial. This is
|
|
the alknet ADR-090 use case generalized; it neither produces nor
|
|
consumes channels.
|
|
|
|
The client wrapper's UDP story is "implement the QUIC runtime's
|
|
abstract socket trait over a SOCKS5 UDP association." quinn 0.11 is
|
|
proven (quinn-proxy POC, ADR-090). noq (iroh's fork, v1.2.0) has the
|
|
same extension point (`AsyncUdpSocket`,
|
|
`Endpoint::new_with_abstract_socket`) but the trait shape changed:
|
|
`create_sender() -> Pin<Box<dyn UdpSender>>` replaces
|
|
`create_io_poller` + `try_send`, and the constructor takes
|
|
`Box<dyn AsyncUdpSocket>` instead of `Arc<dyn AsyncUdpSocket>`.
|
|
|
|
Questions:
|
|
|
|
- Does this crate ship `Socks5UdpSocket` against noq (behind a feature
|
|
like `noq`), quinn (behind `quinn`), or both? Both implies a shared
|
|
substrate-free core (associate handshake, datagram codec, flow table)
|
|
with two thin trait shells — feasible only if the shared core is
|
|
genuinely trait-agnostic. iroh's adoption makes noq the
|
|
practically-important target; alknet's precedent is quinn.
|
|
- noq is not on crates.io at this version (iroh consumes it from the
|
|
n0 workspace/git) — how does this crate depend on it (git dep? wait
|
|
for publication? feature-gate so it is optional)? This may block
|
|
`cargo publish --dry-run` for the client features; a publish-lean
|
|
default (quinn optional, noq git-optional) may be needed.
|
|
- Do the ECN/MTU limitations carry over (they should — the SOCKS5 UDP
|
|
header has no ECN field), and does noq's `may_fragment` default
|
|
(`true`) behave the same as quinn's?
|
|
|
|
This is a research question first (read noq's endpoint/driver loops;
|
|
write the trait-shape comparison), then possibly a POC (OQ-SK-07 #3).
|
|
|
|
### OQ-SK-07: POC scope for what remains unvalidated
|
|
|
|
Candidates, in rough priority order (per the SDD process's "validate
|
|
promising approaches"):
|
|
|
|
1. **Channels-native SOCKS5 CONNECT POC** — the producer half over a
|
|
real alkcall channels connection: consumer opens a SOCKS5 channel,
|
|
speaks RFC 1928 CONNECT (via fast-socks5's client types), producer's
|
|
open handler runs the typestate machine over the `BiStream`, dials a
|
|
local echo target, two-pump proxy loop completes. Validates: the
|
|
`register_openable_with_establisher` fit, `pump_bidi` as the data
|
|
plane, params shape (trivial — probably no params), and the
|
|
`BiStream`-as-`T` genericity claim. This is the crate's core value
|
|
proposition and the cheapest to validate (alktunnels' forward POC is
|
|
the template).
|
|
2. **UDP ASSOCIATE POC** — the OQ-SK-03 chosen shape, end to end: a
|
|
wrapper-aware client associates, sends length-prefixed datagrams
|
|
down the channel, producer relays to a real UDP endpoint. Validates:
|
|
the sentinel-reply semantics, the datagram codec (fast-socks5's
|
|
`new_udp_header`/`parse_udp_request` over the length framing), the
|
|
flow table, and empty-datagram handling (alktunnels F-2 transfers).
|
|
3. **noq `AsyncUdpSocket` impl POC** — the client-side story against
|
|
noq 1.2: associate through a fast-socks5 server, wrap as
|
|
`noq::AsyncUdpSocket`, complete a QUIC handshake. Derisks OQ-SK-06
|
|
(the `create_sender`/`Box` shape changes) before the client spec is
|
|
written. (The quinn variant is already proven by the quinn-proxy
|
|
POC — re-validating it here is optional.)
|
|
4. **fast-socks5 wasm check** — minimal crate, `cargo check --target
|
|
wasm32-unknown-unknown`, confirm/inflect OQ-SK-04. Cheap; can fold
|
|
into #1's worktree.
|
|
|
|
POC placement conventions (inherited from alktunnels): a POC that needs
|
|
code from this repo runs in a worktree/branch (`.worktrees/research/
|
|
<task-id>/` per the SDD process); a self-contained POC runs as a
|
|
standalone crate in the global workspace with findings written into
|
|
`docs/research/` here. Findings always land in `docs/research/`
|
|
regardless of where the code lives.
|
|
|
|
## Survey / prior-art list
|
|
|
|
Candidate reading for the research specialist (to be expanded):
|
|
|
|
- RFC 1928 (SOCKS5) — the fixed protocol: method negotiation, CONNECT,
|
|
BIND, UDP ASSOCIATE, reply codes. RFC 1929 (username/password).
|
|
- fast-socks5 `/workspace/fast-socks5` — `src/server.rs` (typestate
|
|
API, interception points, auth traits), `src/client.rs`
|
|
(`Socks5Stream`/`Socks5Datagram`, `use_stream`), `src/lib.rs`
|
|
(`new_udp_header`/`parse_udp_request`, `ReplyError`),
|
|
`examples/router.rs` (conditional interception), `examples/
|
|
custom_auth_server.rs`.
|
|
- alktunnels — `docs/research/phase-0-findings.md` (the `-D`
|
|
composition conclusion, hub-owns-the-connection, the UDP codec
|
|
decision + F-2), `docs/architecture/` (params/ALPN/ACL ADR template),
|
|
POC summaries (POC placement and findings conventions).
|
|
- alkcall — `docs/architecture/decisions/` ADR-037/039/049/050 (channel
|
|
ops, params-is-ALPN-specific, establishment, pump_bidi), ledger
|
|
CF-005/CF-006 (identity seam), `src/channels/operations.rs`
|
|
(`ChannelCore`, `OpenHandler`, `Establishment`, `ChannelPlan`),
|
|
`src/channels/pump.rs`.
|
|
- alknet — `crates/alknet-client/src/socks5.rs` (ADR-090, the client
|
|
ancestor), `docs/research/quinn-quic-proxy/findings.md` (the POC
|
|
findings: trait + constructor surface, ECN/MTU limitations,
|
|
BotBrowser production precedent).
|
|
- noq — `/workspace/noq`: `noq/src/runtime/mod.rs` (`AsyncUdpSocket`,
|
|
`UdpSender`), `noq/src/endpoint.rs` (`new_with_abstract_socket`),
|
|
`noq-udp/src/lib.rs` (`RecvMeta`, `Transmit`), `Cargo.toml` (workspace
|
|
versioning / publication posture).
|
|
- alktty — backend inversion point (`TtyBackend`), `TTY_OPEN_SCOPE`
|
|
scope-gating shape, feature-gated `local` backend, wasm-clean
|
|
default-crate verification commands.
|
|
- tun2proxy — `/workspace/tun2proxy` `src/udpgw.rs` and its SOCKS5
|
|
files (`socks.rs`, `proxy_handler.rs`): UDP-over-stream framing and
|
|
flow-table prior art (analyzed in alktunnels phase-0-findings; the
|
|
SOCKS5-specific parts feed OQ-SK-03). Also the endgame composition
|
|
partner: it takes `--proxy socks5://...` upstream natively
|
|
(`src/args.rs`) — the vpn-like endgame is tunnel + local bind +
|
|
tun2proxy (§Vision, principle 6).
|
|
- alkhttp — `/workspace/@alkdev/alkhttp`: the native-only precedent in
|
|
the suite (axum/reqwest/hyper, no wasm target) — cited in OQ-SK-04
|
|
as the "wasm-clean is preferred, not mandatory" escape hatch.
|
|
- iroh — `/workspace/iroh` `iroh/Cargo.toml` (the noq dependency
|
|
posture: `noq = "1.2.0"` from the n0 workspace) — context for
|
|
OQ-SK-06's dependency question; also the privacy motivation for the
|
|
client wrapper (relays/peers see the real IP).
|
|
|
|
## Convergence checklist (what Phase 0 must produce)
|
|
|
|
- [ ] Vision + guiding principles captured (this doc, §Vision —
|
|
including the three-component split)
|
|
- [ ] Prior-art pass complete: fast-socks5 surface verified (§Prior
|
|
art), alktunnels/alknet/noq lineage mapped, anti-prior-art list
|
|
written
|
|
- [ ] OQ-SK-01 (dial policy) — researched, half-answered (injected
|
|
dialer hunch); decide in Phase 1 against the spec
|
|
- [ ] OQ-SK-02 (auth mapping) — posture drafted (identity seam
|
|
primary, in-band auth for the local backend); decide in Phase 1
|
|
- [ ] OQ-SK-03 (UDP ASSOCIATE) — the shape space written (including
|
|
the phase-model-vs-alktty-demux analysis); resolve via research
|
|
+ POC #2, ADR before the first consumer
|
|
- [ ] OQ-SK-04 (fast-socks5 wasm) — the decision tree is written
|
|
(Case 1: wasm wanted → fork-first; Case 2: wasm unwanted →
|
|
plain dep, router path); the root question ("does wasm make
|
|
sense for alksocks?") settles on the adapter-story input +
|
|
POC #4's minimality check
|
|
- [ ] OQ-SK-05 (target policy) — folded into the OQ-SK-01 decision;
|
|
scope-gate convention pinned in Phase 1
|
|
- [ ] OQ-SK-06 (noq client) — research pass (trait-shape comparison,
|
|
dependency posture) + POC #3 if the research is not decisive
|
|
- [ ] Targeted POC(s) run + summaries in `docs/research/`
|
|
(OQ-SK-07; #1 first — it validates the core value proposition)
|
|
- [ ] Converge: recommended approach written up, ready to hand to the
|
|
Architect for Phase 1 |