Part of the process while moving QUIC through IETF was separating it from the HTTP layer, which is why now HTTP/3 and QUIC are different things - although given history and involved players, the HTTP use case was a priority, but other companies are looking to use it underneath other protocols. From my understanding, compared to HTTP/2, the stream concept has moved out of the HTTP spec in the underlying level, where it hopefully can benefit other use cases too.
Re:HTTP/3 explained
by justincormack on Tuesday February 05, 2019 @02:49PM
(#19089039)
Indeed, and the encryption is split too. Overall it is starting to look nice to use, although I need to read the spec in more detail to understand a bunch of the details.
Re:HTTP/3 explained
by collinmanderson on Wednesday February 06, 2019 @12:43PM
(#19097529)
http/2 usage has gone from 24% to 33% in the last year, which is pretty good growth.
Instead we now have transport layers that are application specific and 3 completely different web protocols with none of them being considered legacy, 2 of them being complex enough that people aren't very willing to move.
That does not look like a good foundation for anything.