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

MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 87 posts

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#61

Post by nxc18 »

garaetjjte wrote: post #56
battery_cowboy wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you, and I'm happy that it seems like they are trying to become a good steward in the software industry. I am impressed by the quality of Windows 10, up to about a year ago I used Linux daily because it was a better experience than Windows 98 through 8.1, until recently. Lately, I find it's way easier to run Windows 10 with WSL rather than screw around with Linux trying to get things to work correctly that I…

>I am impressed by the quality of Windows 10 Weird, I must have some different edition of Windows. Totally inconsistent settings/control panel interfaces, updates taking ages, updates failing when you look at it wrong (and then stuck in update-revert loop every boot), driver setup taking minutes, and I constantly discover some new disk-hogging background process.

You're forgetting about the comparison to a linux desktop though.

I personally would really love to switch to Ubuntu full time, but I'm not going to forgive it soon for bricking my machine after a software update.

Unfortunately for Linux, the automated recovery tools just aren't there like on Windows - if a Windows update breaks the system, it will be able to recover itself 90% of the time.

Yeah, the UI is shitty and inconsistent and there's lots of nonsense in the background, but ultimately those don't matter as much as baseline reliability. No one hunts for WiFi drivers on Windows, at least not since Vista.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#62

Post by MrStonedOne »

slowstart wrote: post #4

Please fire away any questions you may have! I lead the team that built this library. This blog has details on current development status and adoption within Microsoft: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/networking-blog/msqui...

Do you think you've adquently built something that can be used as a transport layer first, compared to googles attempt that seems more like a http snowflake first and a transport layer second.

QUIC has the potential to be helpful in game development but suffers from an overly specialized approach.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#63

Post by EvanAnderson »

nxc18 wrote: post #61
garaetjjte wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am impressed by the quality of Windows 10 Weird, I must have some different edition of Windows. Totally inconsistent settings/control panel interfaces, updates taking ages, updates failing when you look at it wrong (and then stuck in update-revert loop every boot), driver setup taking minutes, and I constantly discover some new disk-hogging background process.

You're forgetting about the comparison to a linux desktop though. I personally would really love to switch to Ubuntu full time, but I'm not going to forgive it soon for bricking my machine after a software update. Unfortunately for Linux, the automated recovery tools just aren't there like on Windows - if a Windows update breaks the system, it will be able to recover itself 90% of the time. Yeah, the UI is shitty and…

Compared to the last Linux GUI distros I used Windows 10 is a massive step up. Compared to Windows 7 it's a massive step down. Can't speak to Linux distros bricking my or my Customers' machines. Windows 10 update-induced issues have caused me a lot more headaches than Windows 7 ever did, though.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#64

Post by gnulinux »

a_imho wrote: post #52
simonw wrote: post #3

MIT licensed cross-platform C. Ten years ago I wouldn't have believed it. Today it's not even surprising. I really like this version of Microsoft.

People cheering on Microsoft embracing things. Ten years ago I wouldn't have believed it. Today it's not even surprising. /s

I'm just waiting for the sine curve to come down again. Companies who can change from that to this in 10 years because FLOSS became hip and popular, can change the other way around if it increases their profits.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#65

Post by profquail »

slowstart wrote: post #4

Please fire away any questions you may have! I lead the team that built this library. This blog has details on current development status and adoption within Microsoft: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/networking-blog/msqui...

Have you considered implementing any parts of this in F* (so they can be verified) and extracting back to C, as is being done for TLS?

https://project-everest.github.io/

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#66

Post by slowstart »

legulere wrote: post #21

> MsQuic is shipped in-box in the Windows kernel in the form of the msquic.sys driver Does that mean that a HTTP.SYS Webserver will also Support QUIC?

We are currently testing HTTP/3 support in IIS/http.sys internally. Cannot comment on any external product release timelines.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#67

Post by nibanks »

MrStonedOne wrote: post #62
slowstart wrote: post #4

Please fire away any questions you may have! I lead the team that built this library. This blog has details on current development status and adoption within Microsoft: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/networking-blog/msqui...

Do you think you've adquently built something that can be used as a transport layer first, compared to googles attempt that seems more like a http snowflake first and a transport layer second. QUIC has the potential to be helpful in game development but suffers from an overly specialized approach.

Yes, msquic should be a good general purpose transport. We already have usage from SMB (file sharing) and HTTP in Windows. Both are very different and provided good test cases for msquic.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#68

Post by beagle3 »

akmittal wrote: post #38

Why everyone is making their own QUIC implementations. There are so many already https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QUIC#Source_code

Likely for the same reason everyone tries making their own web browser, even though the other guys' are all gratis (and many of them libre): When something is a platform, you are either a landlord or a tenant.

Google and Apple have seen what happens to Microsoft's tenants, so they decided to be landlords. Microsoft knows how awful a landlord it had been (and after decades of landlord-only status, suffered abuse as a tenant at Google's gmail and youtube platforms), so it also tries to be a landlord in every way it can; It couldn't attract it's own tenants to Windows Phone, IE11 and its own Edge, so it has to offer subleases on Android, iOS and Blink(=Edgium) these days.

QUIC looks more "behind the scenes" as a platform right now, but building your own is a very cheap hedge against ceding complete control of what could become a potentially fundamental platform to your competitors. So everyone does that.

I'm no fan of Microsoft, and I believe that Microsoft has been "beaten to submission" rather than "left the dark side", so to speak. But regardless of the overall technical quality or moral/values one assigns to Microsoft - they are a smart, politically and business oriented and savvy corporation. This is a "staying relevant and in control" move.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#69

Post by snarfy »

gnulinux wrote: post #64
a_imho wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People cheering on Microsoft embracing things. Ten years ago I wouldn't have believed it. Today it's not even surprising. /s

I'm just waiting for the sine curve to come down again. Companies who can change from that to this in 10 years because FLOSS became hip and popular, can change the other way around if it increases their profits.

I don't think that will happen as long as Satya is driving.

Re: MsQuic – QUIC Implementation from Microsoft

#70

Post by nibanks »

netheril96 wrote: post #32
slowstart wrote: post #4

Please fire away any questions you may have! I lead the team that built this library. This blog has details on current development status and adoption within Microsoft: https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/t5/networking-blog/msqui...

Will BBR congestion control be supported? Without it QUIC performance cannot match that of TCP, in my environment at least.

It's definitely on the TODO list. We're looking into it.
Post reply on HN