4 ms·

Sounds overly complicated, I doubt this will have a widespread adoption

ofrzeta 1y ago
"As of September 2024, HTTP/3 is supported by more than 95% of major web browsers in use and 34% of the top 10 million websites." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3
- karel-3d 1y ago
  A lot of servers still don't support that. Go http webserver doesn't support http 3 without external libraries. Nginx doesn't support http 3. Apache doesn't support http 3. node.js doesn't support http 3. Kubernetes ingress doesn't support http 3. should I go on? edit: even curl itself - which created the original document linked above - has http 3 just in an experimental build.
  - miyuru 1y ago
    >Nginx doesn't support http 3 nginx do support it. https://nginx.org/en/docs/quic.html https://nginx.org/en/docs/quic.html
    - karel-3d 1y ago
      ah okay i was wrong there, mea culpa
    - dotancohen 1y ago
      The guy's point still stands - lots of popular software do not yet support http3.
    - karel-3d 1y ago
      And I see I was not that wrong; the module is still marked as "experimental" and not built by default. https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_v3_module.html https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_v3_module.html
  - aleks_me2 1y ago
    Well this statement have to be precised. caddyserver v2 supports HTTP/3 and it's an webserver written in go https://caddyserver.com/features https://caddyserver.com/features FYI: There is also an rust webserver which supports HTTP/3. https://v2.ferronweb.org/ https://v2.ferronweb.org/
    - karel-3d 1y ago
      Go built-in webserver.
  - samueloph 1y ago
    > edit: even curl itself - which created the original document linked above - has http 3 just in an experimental build. It's not experimental when built with ngtcp2, which is what you will get on distros like Debian 13-backports (plain Debian 13 uses OpenSSL-QUIC), Debian 14 and onward, Arch Linux and Gentoo. Reference: https://curl.se/docs/http3.html https://curl.se/docs/http3.html
- pimterry 1y ago
  Yes and, at the same time practical support within programming language standard libraries & common tooling lags way behind: https://httptoolkit.com/blog/http3-quic-open-source-support-nowhere/ https://httptoolkit.com/blog/http3-quic-open-source-support-...
  - taffer 1y ago
    You will get most of the benefits of HTTP 3 even if your app libraries run HTTP 1.1, as long as the app is behind a reverse proxy that speaks HTTP 3.
    - theandrewbailey 1y ago
      I use HAproxy to get HTTP/3. https://www.haproxy.org/ https://www.haproxy.org/ https://haproxy.debian.net/ https://haproxy.debian.net/ https://www.haproxy.com/blog/how-to-enable-quic-load-balancing-on-haproxy https://www.haproxy.com/blog/how-to-enable-quic-load-balanci...
    - kunley 1y ago
      Yep, for example, Caddy (zero special configuration to enable HTTP 3)
gucci-on-fleek 1y ago
About 30% percent of traffic to Cloudflare uses HTTP/3 [0], so it seems pretty popular already. For comparison, this is 3× as much traffic as HTTP/1.1. [0]: https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#http1x-vs-http2-vs-http3 https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#http1x-vs-ht...
- mgaunard 1y ago
  and then cloudflare converts that to http/2 or even 1.1 for the backend
  - vanviegen 1y ago
    So? Those protocols work fine within the reliable low latency network of a datacenter.
    - wongarsu 1y ago
      I'd even go as far as claiming that on reliable wired connections (like between cloudflare and your backend) HTTP/2 is superior to HTTP/3. Choosing HTTP/3 for that part of the journey would be a downgrade
      - klempner 1y ago
        At the very least, the benefits of QUIC are very very dubious for low RTT connections like inside a datacenter, especially when you're losing a bunch of hardware support and moving a fair bit of actual work to userspace where threads need to be scheduled etc. On the other hand Cloudflare to backend is not necessarily low RTT and likely has nonzero congestion. With that said, I am 100% in agreement that the primary benefits of QUIC in most cases would be between client and CDN, whereas the costs are comparable at every hop.
        hshdhdhehd 1y ago
        Is CF typically serving from the edge, or serving from the nearest to the server? I imagine it would be from the edge so that it can CDN what it can. So... most of the time it wont be a low latency connection from CF to backend. Unless your back end is globally distributed too.
frmdstryr 1y ago
Also apparently slower over fast connections https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.09423 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.09423
- DaSHacka 1y ago
  A decrease in throughput is a small price to pay for progress

"As of September 2024, HTTP/3 is supported by more than 95% of major web browsers in use and 34% of the top 10 million websites." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP/3

karel-3d 1y ago
A lot of servers still don't support that. Go http webserver doesn't support http 3 without external libraries. Nginx doesn't support http 3. Apache doesn't support http 3. node.js doesn't support http 3. Kubernetes ingress doesn't support http 3. should I go on? edit: even curl itself - which created the original document linked above - has http 3 just in an experimental build.
- miyuru 1y ago
  >Nginx doesn't support http 3 nginx do support it. https://nginx.org/en/docs/quic.html https://nginx.org/en/docs/quic.html
  - karel-3d 1y ago
    ah okay i was wrong there, mea culpa
  - dotancohen 1y ago
    The guy's point still stands - lots of popular software do not yet support http3.
  - karel-3d 1y ago
    And I see I was not that wrong; the module is still marked as "experimental" and not built by default. https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_v3_module.html https://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_v3_module.html
- aleks_me2 1y ago
  Well this statement have to be precised. caddyserver v2 supports HTTP/3 and it's an webserver written in go https://caddyserver.com/features https://caddyserver.com/features FYI: There is also an rust webserver which supports HTTP/3. https://v2.ferronweb.org/ https://v2.ferronweb.org/
  - karel-3d 1y ago
    Go built-in webserver.
- samueloph 1y ago
  > edit: even curl itself - which created the original document linked above - has http 3 just in an experimental build. It's not experimental when built with ngtcp2, which is what you will get on distros like Debian 13-backports (plain Debian 13 uses OpenSSL-QUIC), Debian 14 and onward, Arch Linux and Gentoo. Reference: https://curl.se/docs/http3.html https://curl.se/docs/http3.html
pimterry 1y ago
Yes and, at the same time practical support within programming language standard libraries & common tooling lags way behind: https://httptoolkit.com/blog/http3-quic-open-source-support-nowhere/ https://httptoolkit.com/blog/http3-quic-open-source-support-...
- taffer 1y ago
  You will get most of the benefits of HTTP 3 even if your app libraries run HTTP 1.1, as long as the app is behind a reverse proxy that speaks HTTP 3.
  - theandrewbailey 1y ago
    I use HAproxy to get HTTP/3. https://www.haproxy.org/ https://www.haproxy.org/ https://haproxy.debian.net/ https://haproxy.debian.net/ https://www.haproxy.com/blog/how-to-enable-quic-load-balancing-on-haproxy https://www.haproxy.com/blog/how-to-enable-quic-load-balanci...
  - kunley 1y ago
    Yep, for example, Caddy (zero special configuration to enable HTTP 3)

gucci-on-fleek 1y ago

About 30% percent of traffic to Cloudflare uses HTTP/3 [0], so it seems pretty popular already. For comparison, this is 3× as much traffic as HTTP/1.1. [0]: https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#http1x-vs-http2-vs-http3 https://radar.cloudflare.com/adoption-and-usage#http1x-vs-ht...

mgaunard 1y ago
and then cloudflare converts that to http/2 or even 1.1 for the backend
- vanviegen 1y ago
  So? Those protocols work fine within the reliable low latency network of a datacenter.
  - wongarsu 1y ago
    I'd even go as far as claiming that on reliable wired connections (like between cloudflare and your backend) HTTP/2 is superior to HTTP/3. Choosing HTTP/3 for that part of the journey would be a downgrade
    - klempner 1y ago
      At the very least, the benefits of QUIC are very very dubious for low RTT connections like inside a datacenter, especially when you're losing a bunch of hardware support and moving a fair bit of actual work to userspace where threads need to be scheduled etc. On the other hand Cloudflare to backend is not necessarily low RTT and likely has nonzero congestion. With that said, I am 100% in agreement that the primary benefits of QUIC in most cases would be between client and CDN, whereas the costs are comparable at every hop.
      - hshdhdhehd 1y ago
        Is CF typically serving from the edge, or serving from the nearest to the server? I imagine it would be from the edge so that it can CDN what it can. So... most of the time it wont be a low latency connection from CF to backend. Unless your back end is globally distributed too.

frmdstryr 1y ago

Also apparently slower over fast connections https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.09423 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2310.09423

DaSHacka 1y ago
A decrease in throughput is a small price to pay for progress