Re: Unidirectional streams PR

[Martin Duke <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 10:16 PM, Subodh Iyengar <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > Without such a signal, a generic proxy that is not aware of your
> application internals is not able to know when to send the FIN
>
> I see, this use case does make somewhat sense, however I'm curious
> if someone has a concrete use case for a generic QUIC proxy which is not
> aware of the application protocol at all. In TCP this was more common for
> middleboxes to do because there was no end to end encryption of the
> transport, however QUIC is encrypted. Even with cases when we tunneling
> protocols at our end, we usually have some knowledge of the app that we are
> running because we need to route them differently to different backends. I
> was mostly thinking that proxies would at least have some knowledge about
> HTTP/2 or app protocols.
>

Some load balancers (including ours) terminate the transport connection.
Being trusted middleboxes, they have the certificates and this sort of
thing works in principle.

That said, in such a case it's entirely feasible to implement HTTP/2 on the
middlebox as well.

However, I think we should look forward to the day where QUIC is
implemented in kernel space and HTTP/2 (and everything else) remains an
application. I imagine counting on all applications to do this kind of
garbage collection could cause problems.