3 ms·
> Killing TCP/IP completely and inventing a more efficiently compressed, more government resistant and more easily encryptable Protocol would be highly anticip
by jimktrains2 13y ago
> Killing TCP/IP completely and inventing a more efficiently compressed, more government resistant and more easily encryptable Protocol would be highly anticipated.
You do realize HTTP and TCP/IP reside at very different OSI stack levels, right? Reïnventing TCP is not HTTP's job.
- X4 13y agoeh, yes.. now what? You do realize that the HTTP RFCs define what protcols are used? I know that most TCP improvements mostly add new behaviour to specific situations, especially congestion and yes I have read those papers/links. I know that many improvements are UDP based. So, I think you misread it. I said kill TCP/IP in order to replace it by something better and wished that HTTP/2.0 would be that anticipated step. Did you even check the alternatives, before going negative?
- jimktrains2 13y ago> Did you even check the alternatives, before going negative? One does not need alternatives to dislike a system. Alternatives may affect if the system is used, but they don't negate criticism of it. I don't think HTTP 2 should replace TCP/IP or any other protocol that low in the OSI stack. That is not what HTTP was designed for and I believe throwing out the ideas behind its creation and still calling a new protocol HTTP is disingenuous.