> I don't understand the "HTTP snippets transmuted into binary" part.
Yup, my mistake, I meant to say HTTP3 over QUIC.
At a previous company(many years ago), I designed a protocol that was a replacement for aspera. The idea being that it could allow high speed transfer over long distance, with high packet loss (think 130-150ms ping). We could max out a 1gig link without much effort, even with >0.5% packet loss.
In its present form its optimised for throughput rather than latency. However its perfectly possible to tune it on fly to optimise for latency.
QUIC itself doesn't have the request/response style of HTTP, it doesn't know anything about HTTP, it's just datagrams and streams inside the tunnel.
So you could use QUIC to build a competitor to HTTP/3, a custom protocol with bi-directional control, data, and metadata streams.
In fact, I'm looking forward to when Someone Else writes an SFTP / FTP replacement in QUIC. HTTP is already a better file transfer protocol than FTP. (because HTTP has byte-range headers, which AIUI are not well-supported by FTP servers) Think how much we could do if multiple streams and encryption were as simple as importing one library.