Right, I've been saying this for a while, it seems that many of the hyperscalers/etc made the mistake of trying to utilize TCP (and maybe HTTP/etc) for their (g

Right, I've been saying this for a while, it seems that many of the hyperscalers/etc made the mistake of trying to utilize TCP (and maybe HTTP/etc) for their (generic) RPC mechanisms. Which is hardly the best plan, when what is actually needed is just a reliable datagram protocol without a bunch of connection state. So, while the actual RPC protocol has its own issues, the one thing they got right was the ability for the portmapper to indicate UDP vs TCP as the transport on a service basis. There have been a few improved generic RPC mechanisms, and I don't really understand why some of these places feel the need to "replace TCP" when really what they need is a more formalized RPC mechanism that can set/detect the datagram reliability and pick varying levels of protocol retry/etc as needed.