Re: Multipath QUIC prototypes
Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Mon, 13 September 2021 17:09 UTC
Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A4AD3A0C3B for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:09:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.649
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.649 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id j1u3vZfb_aJL for <quic@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-f170.google.com (mail-yb1-f170.google.com [209.85.219.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D588A3A0C40 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-f170.google.com with SMTP id a93so22001553ybi.1 for <quic@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:08:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=G7hrIWuoFnjoVsM2y9WDIEJSjHAUGW6gwIsq2FH8IUA=; b=AY0KqNyUvi+Oib45MKT9tRBO1pgjkk8yZZ5EbQxci+vklR6Ys3c1NE7zPfBUuZLh4f vGq2oczgeGwS/YkJQtdhZsK+MNERB68I1hG09tOjM4hb9pqJmNZ2QfoAd0xOc4FykoH3 2uKIgrrP5XxyFfy7WHHMisrW7qisVPB7fnTLs0UDq81lPVDZeC2i1YkoUgz6F5QJi1p0 IW2Gs7n5vpieTNle5lHGwHPcwmzQWKRjVeruLNFWxU0EHSbhtS7Sv54dZKb5D1KFBSMj 1CSJB722MY94RBpAhGZ7yOj3gVI9tWAw1/aRXKc5C+szvKLY1+wsX0kinyp2KNxgY4Cp gP2A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531/qOWF8SXeWAQp5D9FV/iZjBRv+YwW8fL+8+8jHDkNoYg/BDta 16EUJwwNoZY6yDR3Rh/zPRjTIe3hlOJ8gial+j8=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxr6nBib4sIMm5Sezj2bW/iZzjdcANt5mBX8OJwbguNF9VjSrVTQzq8byAh2ki8Quw+jOnY64cGP03riBZxkeE=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:5808:: with SMTP id m8mr15056016ybb.334.1631552938916; Mon, 13 Sep 2021 10:08:58 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <2a583307-7acc-323b-202b-1c500a63d358@ericsson.com> <CAMm+LwgGdf8=P_BYQkvn203yePF2bDVZKv=KMg1PHi2VmeSkXg@mail.gmail.com> <CAC8QAccmrLpbdax8k-mHLsM998NVgRUU0TSahLwD1k4zTzU6Gw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC8QAccmrLpbdax8k-mHLsM998NVgRUU0TSahLwD1k4zTzU6Gw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 13:08:48 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+Lwh5ndfjEZMQ0KdmXXafwTP4XGG=xdg67ftftaton2YYVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Multipath QUIC prototypes
To: sarikaya@ieee.org
Cc: Michael Eriksson <michael.eriksson=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, "quic@ietf.org" <quic@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000005b3dcc05cbe38599"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/jkzYf18Kh-pozAPxKINj0qVCRjk>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2021 17:09:02 -0000
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 12:37 PM Behcet Sarikaya <sarikaya2012@gmail.com> wrote: > Good luck Philip. > Maybe you like to reinvent the wheel? > > Behcet > That is exactly the objection people made to HTTP in the first place. That is the objection to QUIC - why not stay with TCP? QUIC is highly optimized to one use case. It is large, it is very complex. At this point, I have not seen anyone show how to layer Web Services over HTTP over QUIC. I do not expect *an* answer to that question, I expect dozens of them only some of which are interoperable. The assertion infrastructure adopted in SAML was originally designed as part of TAXI which was a design commission I was given to re-invent PKIX in XML. I am not alone in looking at alternatives to QUIC going forward. If you want to understand the design choices in QUIC going forward the best way is to design your own.
- Multipath QUIC prototypes Michael Eriksson
- Re: Multipath QUIC prototypes Christian Huitema
- Re: Multipath QUIC prototypes Michael Eriksson
- Re: Multipath QUIC prototypes Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Multipath QUIC prototypes Behcet Sarikaya
- Re: Multipath QUIC prototypes Phillip Hallam-Baker