back to article Quic! Head to the latest Chrome version and try out HTTP/3

The latest iteration of the ubiquitous HTTP internet protocol - version 3 - has hit the web. The new, streamlined version of the protocol that makes hyperlinking possible and powers much of the world’s internet experience has been added to the latest dev version of Google’s Chrome browser, called Canary, and will soon be added …

  1. JohnFen Silver badge

    No hurry

    HTTP/3 doesn't solve any problems that I have, so I'm not going to go out of my way to try it out. It'll come to me eventually.

    1. Tom 7 Silver badge

      Re: No hurry

      Only if it seriousy borks something you rely on.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    There is a great disturbance

    Can we start a couple pools predicting:

    Date of first exploit (could split into Android, Windows, IOs, etc)

    Date of first workable DoS

    Date when the spam rams find a way to use this for broadcast messaging

    1. hmv Bronze badge

      Re: There is a great disturbance

      Or the first firewall to say "what the hell is this shit?".

      Hint: It's already happened.

      1. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

        Re: There is a great disturbance

        Firewall craps out at UDP? In the last two decades?

        1. vgrig_us

          Re: There is a great disturbance

          You're forgetting it's "next-gen" firewalls now... Deep inspection and such. If it doesn't now about higher level protocol - it's gonna flip.

  3. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Alert

    TCP backoff

    It's what's kept the net going until now, Google can screw around with it at their peril (and ours).

    1. JDX Gold badge
      Facepalm

      Re: TCP backoff

      Yeah, Like IP4 who needs anything newer

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: TCP backoff

        I'm not sure why we would need to use the UDP protocol for anything that isn't a short message and response (DNS) or where data loss can be tolerated (VoIP, SIP, video conferencing, etc...).

        The only reason they're gone with it is to avoid congestion control that TCP has so they can claim it's really fast. I didn't realise Google's traffic was more important than everyone else's.

    2. boltar Silver badge

      Don't worry

      Google will get bored with QUIC very soon - as they do with most of their pet projects - and create the next greatest network transport protocol. Meanwhile the rest of the world will carry on with TCP and proxies everywhere will ignore QUIC and block it.

      We've been here before - SCTP was supposed to be a TCP replacement 15 years or so ago. That died a very quick death too. I suspect QUIC will go the same way - there's too much TCP based infrastructure and no one is going to spend a fortune to allow browsers to work better in mobile mode.

      1. EnviableOne Bronze badge

        Re: Don't worry

        some enterprising individual will publish an RFC that backports the usefull features from QUIC into TCP as has happened to IPv4 and RADIUS with the less than adopted IPv6 and DIAMETER

      2. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

        Re: Don't worry

        SCTP died because most of the Internet didn't support it. Everything supports UDP.

        QUIC gives the benefits of SCTP and the compatibility of UDP.

      3. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: Don't worry

        There was also SPDY which pushed by Google, engineering time was spent by other browser makers to get their browsers to support it, then Google unceremoniously buried it.

        1. two00lbwaster

          Re: Don't worry

          Erm, it seems like you're not aware that a lot of the work that went into SPDY was picked up and implemented into the HTTP/2 protocol.

          1. Dan 55 Silver badge

            Re: Don't worry

            Speaking from experience, building something then having to rebuild something similar but not the same is still perhaps not the best use of time.

  4. Jusme
    Alert

    Hmmmm

    Well it seems well intentioned, but given the parents of this innovation (Google and Cloudflare - wannabe owners of the internet) I'm not sure this is a Good Thing.

    Also, if QUIC/IP is replacing TCP/IP, shouldn't that be implemented in the OS, rather than every application? I can imagine a world where there are dozens of buggy, incompatible implementations, so browser X won't talk to site Y. Oh... isn't that handy..........

    1. P. Lee

      Re: Hmmmm

      It appears to be a server optimization.

      It might be useful on mobile devices, but I wouldn't be surprised if "mobile to google" was the only use case that is implemented for a very long time.

      1. Karl Austin

        Nope

        We've already got Draft 22 deployed for a number of customers that want it. We've had QUIC deployed for a number of years now, so not limited to Google. HTTP/2, QUIC, all make an appreciable difference to load speeds of asset heavy sites.

    2. s2bu

      Re: Hmmmm

      QUIC really isn't replacing IP. It runs over UDP, so think of QUIC as kind of like a Layer 5, or really Layer 4.5 if you want to be technical :).

      So instead of TCP/IP, it'll run on UDP/IP, just like SIP, (most)DNS, etc.

      1. hammarbtyp Silver badge

        Re: Hmmmm

        TCP in the Real Time embedded world is generally frowned upon, basically because if you are streaming real time data such as machine control, the last thing you want on a dropped package is to attempted retry. On the other hand HTTP has become the lingua-franca between the enterprise of control worlds .

        It will be interesting to see how this works, and possibly push the HTTP further down the stack.

        1. boltar Silver badge

          Re: Hmmmm

          "and possibly push the HTTP further down the stack."

          By saying that you demonstrate that you have no idea how network stacks work.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Hmmmm

          "[...] the last thing you want on a dropped package is to attempted retry."

          In which case you can use UDP.

          1. MJB7 Silver badge

            Re: In which case you can use UDP

            ... which is what real time protocols do. It is also what QUIC does (QUIC sits on top of UDP).

    3. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: Hmmmm

      Also, if QUIC/IP is replacing TCP/IP, shouldn't that be implemented in the OS, rather than every application? I can imagine a world where there are dozens of buggy, incompatible implementations, so browser X won't talk to site Y. Oh... isn't that handy.......... ..... Jusme

      One might have to consider and realise such is the true nature of that particular game, Jusme, with great lumbering establishment giants terrified of browsers networking with each other over sites which are Proxy Remote Operating Systems.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Hmmmm

        please stop sending

    4. Dr. Mouse Silver badge

      Re: Hmmmm

      To paraphrase American Dad:

      I'm sorry, Google.

      But when there's a new shiney, you make bad decisions.

      They sound reasonable in the moment, but they always end badly.

  5. rnturn

    So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

    > For example, if you leave your house and drive off, there will be a delay - sometimes a significant one - in receiving data as your device shifts from your home Wi-Fi to a cellular network. That can cause a video, or streaming music, or a secure connection to a website to stop or break.

    That's it. It's the end of civilization as we know it. My video or music paused... I was unable to complete my Amazon purchase.... Because I started driving. This is another solution in search of a problem. Seriously... two major corporations decide on joining forces to eliminate the scourge of video pausing? Surely there's another reason they're not publicizing that's the real cause for this partnership.

    Even holding my smartphone at a red light is a ticketable offense where I live. I don't want the thing anywhere where it could be considered a distraction and a cause for a moving violation. I'm safest when it's in my pocket and couldn't care less about my music streaming being interrupted while I'm behind the wheel.

    1. DougS Silver badge
      Angel

      Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

      Hey those pauses cost Amazon sales and Google ad revenue. Won't someone look at it from the viewpoint of the poor suffering tech behemoths for once?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Hey those pauses cost Amazon sales and Google ad revenue.

        And since when is that a bad thing?

        To hear the boss of Amazon UK on the Radio this morning was interesting. So what if they paid £800M in taxes last year. How much of that IS NOT

        PAYE

        N.I.

        VAT

        eh?

        For a stonking great Amazon monstrosity to pay less business rates than a corner shop is as bad as our PM saying Humbug or worse.

        I avoid buying anything from Amazon or it affiliates if at all possible. It is getting harder as the put more and more alternatives out of business.

        And his greenwashing was laughable. As it 100,000 Electric Vans worldwide will solve Global warming?

        Perhaps he is lining up to become our next PM. He can certainly talk like a politician (i.e. open their mouth)

        1. phuzz Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Hey those pauses cost Amazon sales and Google ad revenue.

          "And since when is that a bad thing?"

          Listen carefully. Shh, just listen.

          Do you hear that far off whooshing noise in the distance?

          That's the sound of the joke going so far above your head, it's practically in orbit.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

      Some people, and I know this concept might be strange to many, have passengers instead of a dedicated vehicle per person.

      Some people - I know you won't believe me but if you do some research you will confirm it - WALK!

      There are even people who stream music whilst walking in and out of wifi range.

      Of course there was something called MultipathTCP, but afaik Apple are the only ones who have really paid attention. Google can't be seen to be copying them, can they?

      1. JDX Gold badge

        Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

        Agreed it isn't the end of the world but when it DOES happen it can be very annoying. A real-world use case for me is that my garage is just inside my house WiFi. So My phone tends to keep lunging between WiFi and 4G, which is actually a big PITA. The simple solution is I just disable WiFi when I go to the garage but it is clearly a weakness in the underlying architecture that I should need to.

        If you tend to use free WiFi in places like Costa, McDonalds, etc then I would imagine walking down the high street (if your town still has one) can be irksome as your phone keeps latching onto WiFi for brief periods - and those WiFi are often bad in the first place. I fairly often find I'm somewhere without internet because my phone connected to a WiFi that isn't really working.

        1. boltar Silver badge

          Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

          "The simple solution is I just disable WiFi when I go to the garage but it is clearly a weakness in the underlying architecture that I should need to."

          There's nothing wrong with the architecture, its simply down to RF signal strength which is kept low in Wifi for obvious reasons.

        2. EnviableOne Bronze badge

          Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

          try it when every bus has its own wifi, its a big PITA when you are not on one or your at the back of one bus and you jump to the hospot on the one beside or behind as they pass....

          1. jelabarre59 Silver badge

            Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

            try it when every bus has its own wifi, its a big PITA when you are not on one or your at the back of one bus and you jump to the hospot on the one beside or behind as they pass....

            But we've used that on vacation, shadowing some tour bus while on the interstate, so we could hop on their wifi...

          2. MrReynolds2U

            Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

            Why on earth don't you just turn WiFi off when you leave the house?

      2. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

        Some people, and I know this concept might be strange to many, have passengers instead of a dedicated vehicle per person.

        I know this concept might be strange to many, but it's possible for passengers to pay attention to the other people in the vehicle, or to the world outside, rather than obsessively focusing on streamed media.

        Some people - I know you won't believe me but if you do some research you will confirm it - WALK!

        Some people who walk are similarly capable of paying attention to the world around them.

        I suppose that for those addicted to streaming media that a pause while moving is a nightmare beyond endurance. But somehow many of us survived without unbroken connectivity to mass-market entertainment.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

      hey man. you know those other seats your car came with? they're for people to sit in and do things like stream music from their phones. crazy I know right?!

      1. jelabarre59 Silver badge

        Re: So, turn the Internet upside-down over this?

        I just pre-download my music and have it on a USB stick in the car stereo. Set to play random just to make it interesting.

  6. Robert Carnegie Silver badge

    Technically

    Could we do hyperlinking with just anonymous FTP servers? I mean, we don't, presumably there's a reason...

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Technically

      We could until the browsers knocked that option on the heads last year. No real reason was ever given for removing it.

      1. STOP_FORTH
        Thumb Up

        Re: Technically

        Thanks, I missed that article.

    2. gotes

      Re: Technically

      You can do hyperlinking with a file loaded from a local disk.

      1. Nick Ryan Silver badge

        Re: Technically

        Much faster too than pesky Internet downloads. And "works for me"

  7. Neil Barnes Silver badge

    HTTP3: faster?

    That will be because it disables adverts and scripting, and just sends the content? Great!

    <and then I woke up and it was all a dream...>

  8. schafdog

    /var

    Will it leave my macOS working after installation?

    1. Terje
      Trollface

      Re: /var

      I would consider and apple product that fail to boot as a net positive!

  9. Claverhouse Silver badge
    Alert

    Ugh

    The two companies I mistrust most post Microsoft --- Cloudflare because it's a CDN and Google because it's Google --- are re-engineering the Internet ?

    Worst news since Fat Slab, aka Flat Style.

  10. disgustedoftunbridgewells Silver badge

    Why would NAT be a problem?

    QUIC is built on top of UDP, which works fine with NATs.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      gnats are a problem though

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    IIRC IPv6 addressing was designed to follow mobile devices. Are the switching times for that too long?

  12. Blane Bramble

    Great, handover from one device (IP) to another (IP). The cyber criminals are going to love this when they work out how to completely steal your live session and redirect it their device.

  13. PiltdownMan

    Hmmm, sounds like QUIC allows Google to track you more easily...

    According to "QUIC at 10,000 feet": "QUIC includes a connection identifier which uniquely identifies the connection to the server regardless of source. This allows the connection to be re-established simply by sending a packet, which always contains this ID, as the original connection ID will still be valid even if the user's IP address changes."

    Sounds like another way of tracking you when your IP address changes?

  14. D.U.B

    While I am no expert, my limited understanding is that these are encrypted UDP tunnels.

    All the congestion control, packet loss etc, and Sauasage-Pizza-Away layers, are handled by software on the remote server and in client side software?

    Makes it a little harder for Network Admin's to identify traffic in my opinion, all connections are port 443.

    No more checking known ports and services-just an opaque wall..who knows whats flowing through the tunnel, WireShark is not my friend here....

    I wonder how long until miscreants start utilizing this protocol for data exfiltration, command and control, etc?

  15. C_D

    Unstable is right

    In fact, unstable enough to cauterize parts of your operating system - though the blood curdling effect appears limited to Macs (ref /var-sectomy on el reg)

  16. jamesdagger

    Pronounced

    Koo-eek!

    With a distinct Black Country accent.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019