RSSH routed egress (dev-only VPN over SSH) — source draft
R0-pre
severity: low
state: postponed (finish WireGuard track first)

Problem:
- PO asked whether RSSH can get a system-wide VPN provider that routes part or all device traffic through the RSSH tunnel (split or full), dev settings only.
- Today RSSH is reverse SSH (-R) for operator → device shell/SFTP; no VpnService, no WAN egress change.
- WireGuard already supports hub-only / full-tunnel + all-apps / this-app-only via RemoteAccessVpnRouting.

Why consider RSSH routing at all:
- TCP 443 only path (no UDP WG) in hostile networks.
- Single transport for alpha if WG UDP blocked.

Why defer:
- Alpha RSSH goal = no VPN permission, no key icon, file/shell access.
- WG full-tunnel solves "egress via hub" for lab now.
- RSSH+VPN is new subsystem (SOCKS or tun2socks + VpnService + bastion NAT), not a setting.

Options sketched:
A) Use WG full-tunnel (existing) — recommended near-term for routing.
B) RSSH + ssh -D SOCKS + VpnService + tun2socks — dev experimental.
C) ssh -w tun both ends — heavy, skip.
D) Hybrid: WG packets + RSSH operator — already in proposal doc.

DR should decide: postpone until WG E2E closed; if revived, dev-only sub-mode under RSSH.

Open for PO:
- Is TCP-only routing worth duplicating WG?
- Accept VPN icon/consent again for RSSH-routed mode?
- Bastion egress NAT policy (Minsk) for dev traffic?
