2 ms·
I guess my question wasn't clear; why would they create a new seemingly unrelated spec to try to try to bring WebSockets up to where WebRTC is rather than just
by saurik 6y ago
I guess my question wasn't clear; why would they create a new seemingly unrelated spec to try to try to bring WebSockets up to where WebRTC is rather than just add the little tiny signalling bit to WebRTC? (Particularly since people are also simultaneously trying to bring QUIC transports to WebRTC data channels?) We shouldn't be maintaining so many separate protocol stacks and APIs in the browser. (Context: I use WebRTC in my day job, not as a side project, and have been working with it for years now ;P.)
- pthatcherg 6y agoThe effort to bring QUIC to WebRTC is the kind of the same effort. The WebTransport is an outgrowth of that effort. They are not unrelated. As for "too many protocols": QUIC is already in the browser. This is just giving you an API to it. Think of it like WebSockets for the HTTP3 world.