frp vs Mosh
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted remote access & vpn options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
frp
Fast reverse proxy to expose local servers behind NAT
VS
Mosh
Mobile shell with roaming and intermittent connectivity
| Feature | frp | Mosh |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Remote Access & VPN | Remote Access & VPN |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | C++ |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | binary, docker | bare-metal, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 108,622 | ★ 14,307 |
| First released | 2016 | 2012 |
| Replaces | ngrok | SSH |
Why pick each one
Choose frp if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 108.6k GitHub stars
- Written in Go
Choose Mosh if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Mature project with 14.3k GitHub stars
- Written in C++
Frequently asked questions
Is frp or Mosh better?
Neither is universally better. frp has the larger community, while Mosh is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are frp and Mosh free and open-source?
Yes. frp is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Mosh under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run frp and Mosh with Docker?
frp: yes. Mosh: check the project docs for container support.