7 ms·

I wonder how much different would it be if HTTP/3 was based on SCTP instead of on UDP. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_Control_Transmission_Protocol htt

I wonder how much different would it be if HTTP/3 was based on SCTP instead of on UDP. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_Control_Transmission_Protocol https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stream_Control_Transmission_... In a parallel universe: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-natarajan-http-over-sctp-02 https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-natarajan-http-over-sctp-0... It might be that http 4 experiment this

bawolff 6y ago
It wouldn't be adopted due to middle boxes, so all the difference?
- The_rationalist 6y ago
  Until middleboxes support SCTP, UDP encapsulation is a possible solution That would mean that HTTP3 enable HTTP4 towards STCP
Avamander 6y ago
Maybe in the future someone will make an implementation. But right now I don't see it happening, SCTP has too many problems with deployment.
FlyingAvatar 6y ago
I see UDP as superior in general, and don't see a good reason to use SCTP at this point for any real use case. IMO, it's a "good thing" for applications (or types of application) to have control over the Transmission Layer since the characteristics that each type of application might desire is different. Want your app to use raw UDP sockets? Easy. Want to use QUIC? Use a QUIC library. HTTP/3? Use and HTTP/3 library. If it all used SCTP, you are locked in to its feature set and are likely to end up with new problems similar to what we see with TCP. I could possibly UDP/QUIC taking over TCP in a long, long while, but SCTP is not likely to ever be usefully supported because there isn't a compelling reason to do it.