4 ms·
> QUIC is awesome It would've been more awesome if it supported BBR for congestion control. QUIC gains in practice can be annihilated just by not having BBR im
by xpl 2y ago
> QUIC is awesome
It would've been more awesome if it supported BBR for congestion control. QUIC gains in practice can be annihilated just by not having BBR implemented in the protocol, so sometimes QUIC could be even slower than HTTP2 over TCP (if TCP is properly configured).
- stiglitz 2y agoFYI quic is compatible with bbr, and at least the google and msft quic implementations have bbr (albeit not by default afaik).
- klabb3 2y agoIn my experience QUIC is worse than TCP in a heterogeneous environment when optimizing for throughput. The added CPU usage from user space packet switching is a big factor for battery powered devices and congestion control lives its own life which often means it doesn’t get its fair share of bandwidth in the presence of TCP traffic. I think QUIC can be awesome, and I hope it will. But I wouldn’t say we’re there yet. Low level kernel-adjacent things takes time. Networks are extremely heterogeneous and weird. Maybe in 5-10 years. In the short-medium term, I think we could get much more bang for the buck if there was an easy way to improve the defaults on Linux and/or its distros.