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 …
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.
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.
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..........
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.
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.
> 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.
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)
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?
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.
"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.
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...
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.
We could until the browsers knocked that option on the heads last year. No real reason was ever given for removing it.
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?
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?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
