Re: [Moq] Exploring HTTP/3

[Lucas Pardue <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, 8 Feb 2023, 23:24 Roberto Peon, <[e-mail]> wrote:

> The “HTTP push problem” isn’t going to get better with another protocol,
> as the problem wasn’t the protocol itself.
> Or, putting it another way, if we wish to eliminate 1-RTT or ½ RTT, then
> we need something that is PUSH, even if the name is different.
> If that PUSH thing has caching, it helps with session establishment
> latency and scalability.
> If it doesn’t, then everyone has to invent all of that, including all of
> the security missteps again.
>

I agree Roberto.

It's not the delivery pattern but APIs to make it useful.  Already the
WebTransport W3C API supports receiving pushed data, in JavaScript, which
HTTP/[2,3] server push never did (and probably never will).

Cheers
Lucas

>
> -=R
>
>
>
> *From: *Moq <[e-mail]> on behalf of Lucas Pardue <
> [e-mail]>
> *Date: *Wednesday, February 8, 2023 at 2:54 PM
> *To: *Luke Curley <[e-mail]>
> *Cc: *MOQ Mailing List <[e-mail]>
> *Subject: *Re: [Moq] Exploring HTTP/3
>
> Heya, On Wed, 8 Feb 2023, 20: 01 Luke Curley, <kixelated@ gmail. com>
> wrote: I've never used it before, but I know Youtube supports HLS for
> contribution. Use PUT instead of GET and you have a publisher. I don't
> think it would be
>
> Heya,
>
> On Wed, 8 Feb 2023, 20:01 Luke Curley, <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> I've never used it before, but I know Youtube supports HLS for
> contribution. Use PUT instead of GET and you have a publisher. I don't
> think it would be too hairy, although it would require switching from push
> to pull at an origin.
>
>
>
> Yeah there's a few HTTP contribution-type protocols I know of but have
> little direct personal experience with (hello WHIP). I don't know how they
> compare to the object model we have been talking about in MoQ, are they
> close or far off? Or is that the wrong sort of question to ask?
>
>
>
>
>
> And yeah, I agree that browsers are the main obstacles when pushing media,
> but that doesn't change too much with WebTransport. We still need a way to
> set the priority when pushing a WebTransport stream, much like we would
> need a way to set the priority when issuing a HTTP PUT. I suppose it's
> easier to modify WebTransport since it's in development.
>
>
>
> The W3C WebTransport WG has been considering the questions of
> prioritization and congestion control feedback for a relatively long time.
> And we have been making progress. It has the right people and the right
> charter to work on it. I'm a little pessimistic about trying to get
> momentum for HTTP upload changes MoQ could require, in the sorts of
> timeframes that MoQ would find useful. For context, fetch does even support
> preference of HTTP version, nor exposese connection pooling. But maybe I'm
> too conservative in this regard. Asking ourselves the questions is
> definitely worthwhile.
>
>
>
> Cheers
>
> Lucas
>