Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Guidance for port number use (#495)

[hardie <[e-mail]>]

While I like this point with my RTCWEB chair hat on:

"Do P2P QUIC without fighting network ossification. P2P QUIC could be useful for WebRTC-like applications, which will necessarily run on high-numbered ports. Keeping those flows identical to client-server QUIC would help us avoid the kind of ossification that required awful workarounds in WebRTC, like ssltcp and TURN-TLS candidates."

It makes my ACME chair hat hurt me because I think it might make constructing a challenge using QUIC very difficult to get right.  With the Alt-Svc approach and HTTP, you will get the authoritative server options based on the control of TCP 443, so you can finesse it here.  But it may be less easy to finesse with other protocols using QUIC.

@bifurcation can you take a look at this?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/495#issuecomment-299323909