Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

brighttalk.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 142 posts

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#11

Post by tyingq »

kazen44 wrote: post #9
JoshTriplett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally those incentives would be combined with disincentives for those organizations to continue breaking the web. A combination of the two seems more likely to be successful than either alone.

tcp != the web. Also, most firewall don't break TCP, they break HTTP(S) because they want levels of control.

The corporate firewalls I'm talking about do often break UDP. Because chrome races QUIC/UDP with HTTP(S)/TCP, the big corps are often unaware it's broken. Chrome works around it.

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#13

Post by azinman2 »

tyingq wrote: post #11
kazen44 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

tcp != the web. Also, most firewall don't break TCP, they break HTTP(S) because they want levels of control.

The corporate firewalls I'm talking about do often break UDP. Because chrome races QUIC/UDP with HTTP(S)/TCP, the big corps are often unaware it's broken. Chrome works around it.

So it doubles the traffic?

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#15

Post by tyingq »

azinman2 wrote: post #13
tyingq wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The corporate firewalls I'm talking about do often break UDP. Because chrome races QUIC/UDP with HTTP(S)/TCP, the big corps are often unaware it's broken. Chrome works around it.

So it doubles the traffic?

Initial "connection" packets, yes. (yes, I get UDP is connectionless, but I assume you know what I mean)

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#16

Post by jchw »

xxpor wrote: post #4

HTTP isn't the only L7 protocol.

Nothing prevents you from using QUIC as a replacement for TCP AFAIK - on the surface it seems like it would be potentially useful for more applications than HTTP. May even be a decent option for video games and other things that need somewhat lower latency and wish to avoid head-of-line blocking.

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#17

Post by OrangeMango »

I've been told in the recent past that there is so much old internet infrastructure equipment that only knows UDP and TCP that any other protocol will fail to meaningfully catch on. This equipment will drop anything that isn't TCP or UDP and until it's replaced you will have a lot of trouble.

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#18

Post by acheron »

I see no problems in Google continuing to replace basic protocols. In fact, why not get rid of the open Internet altogether and just use all Google products all the time? It'll be like the good old days of AOL.

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#19

Post by matthewmacleod »

OrangeMango wrote: post #17

I've been told in the recent past that there is so much old internet infrastructure equipment that only knows UDP and TCP that any other protocol will fail to meaningfully catch on. This equipment will drop anything that isn't TCP or UDP and until it's replaced you will have a lot of trouble.

QUIC operates over UDP. That’s really why this question is worth asking.

Re: QUIC – Will It Replace TCP/IP?

#20

Post by fiberoptick »

londons_explore wrote: post #6

QUIC has a substantial CPU overhead, due to lack of hardware or kernel acceleration. QUIC deployed worldwide might cost us a power station or two...

And emerging QUIC acceleration technology is likely to be stifled by intellectual property laws.

Intel has already filed (in 2019) for a European patent that seems to claim inventorship of the generic concept of hardware offloading (as it applies to QUIC)

https://data.epo.org/publication-server/pdf-document?pn=3541...

Post reply on HN