3 ms·
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 HTT
by jchw 7y ago
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.
- CameronNemo 7y agoSeeing a BGP implementation running over QUIC would be the end game, right? There is so mug network hardware which will not be replaced for decades, so people would have to get started now if they wanted to completely make TCP redundant in the not so near future.
- chungy 7y ago> 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. Most video games already use UDP
- jchw 7y agoSure. In fact most video games use some kind of networking middleware. But tbh, a lot of them are not so great because a lot of concerns get mixed together, and if you want a reliable connection with congestion control you likely will just open a TCP connection somewhere with a different protocol. For the hobbyist world, this option as a low level transport is not so bad imo. Like as a replacement for ENet which does not have IPv6 support today seems reasonable.
- jayd16 7y agolots of games use UDP, lots of games use TCP. I could easily see games using QUIC. If you include mobile games, I doubt most games have the budget to tune a UDP stack.
- marcthe12 7y agoQUIC seems to have encryption so something like SSH could come