Re:HTTP/3 needs us to make firewall changes
by throw0101a on Saturday June 05, 2021 @08:38AM
(#27404415)
> If firewall changes are necessary for HTTP/3 to be adopted (eg connection tracking in routers may not work anymore), that can cause big problems in adoption.
If firewall changes are necessary for HTTP/3, then it's a slightly 'dumb' protocol in some ways.
If that's a prerequisite, then perhaps more effort should have been spent in getting SCTP and DCCP accepted and run HTTP over one/both of those. QUIC seems to have basically the same feature set AFAICT.
Besides the architecture decision of having QUIC being on top of UDP, are there specific features that are much better than SCTP and/or DCCP? Are the other two better in particular areas? How complementary or competitive are the two approaches? (Genuinely curious.)
If firewall changes are necessary for HTTP/3, then it's a slightly 'dumb' protocol in some ways.
If that's a prerequisite, then perhaps more effort should have been spent in getting SCTP and DCCP accepted and run HTTP over one/both of those. QUIC seems to have basically the same feature set AFAICT.
Besides the architecture decision of having QUIC being on top of UDP, are there specific features that are much better than SCTP and/or DCCP? Are the other two better in particular areas? How complementary or competitive are the two approaches? (Genuinely curious.)