> Making every network-element, every hop, have to add something to the routing table is slow How do you see the QUIC stream layout relating to routing cost?

> Making every network-element, every hop, have to add something to the routing table is slow How do you see the QUIC stream layout relating to routing cost? It's been a few years since I've done larger scale networking but I wouldn't say IP routing changes much between protocols. Router see's destination IP bytes, matches destination IP to network route in table, forwards packet. 10 UDP, TCP or QUIC UDP packets in any stream arrangement are unlikely to route differently or to add/remove cost (in a contrived example ignoring QUIC or TCP protocol overhead). Most "middle" hops are just pushing the packet, at least until you are hitting an AS that controls the endpoint of a connection. Are you referring to hops where application level decisions are being made? Towards each end of a packets route there may be hops to NAT, QoS, L4 routers or firewalls that will try to reconstruct packets into logical sessions where there's a memory/lookup overhead and usually rules applied to the packet. This is likely to decide where the packet ends up but that's not slow and I don't believe QUIC connections are a fundamental leap in this type of tracking over TCP src/dst 4 tuples, apart from the observability improvements the additional quic headers add onto basic src/dst rules.