Re: [quicwg/base-drafts] Priority in QUIC Transport (#104)

[Patrick McManus <[e-mail]>]

I would argue that keeping the tcp send buffers small is where we currently see a lot of implementation mistakes - I can cite a few open server performance bugs with h2 if you think its worth the time to dig through bugzilla. App developers want to fire and forget when they have data in hand. Small-buffers are apparently not an especially usable interface for application protocols.. so if its plausible to push data down into the transport where you've got a late-binded mux, that would probably yield better results in practice even if in theory there is no advantage.

The argument that quic should not be buffering much data is only obviously true if it isn't doing reordering and cancels as well. It could certainly do all those things and in some senses a protocol like this that already entangles transport, security, and the application is a reasonable place to do it. Embrace the monolith :)

I totally agree that retrans is an unimportant, tho interetsting, corner case.


-- 
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/104#issuecomment-270922727