Hi Daniel. Thanks for the quick reply. >But you should of course base any QUIC work for wget on a QUIC library.
So I'm browsing the libraries. And ngtcp2 seems interesting. Can we use it in wget2? I'm also considering other options. Any suggestions on picking a perticular library? On Fri 9 Mar, 2018, 3:51 AM Daniel Stenberg, <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Jay Bhavsar wrote: > > > I am considering to apply for "Support QUIC Protocol". I have read this > > < > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WJvyZflAO2pq77yOLbp9NsGjC1CHetAXV8I0fQe-B_U/edit > > > > specification, and understood most of it. > > Hi Jay, > > The QUIC protocol of the future is the one that is being standardized by > the > IETF *right now* and is planned to get done by the end of this year. Adding > support for Google's old (current) version of QUIC has much less value for > the > future (in my opinion). > > The current working drafts for the protocol are here: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/quic/documents/ > > But you should of course base any QUIC work for wget on a QUIC library. > You'll > find existing implementations listed here: > > https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/wiki/Implementations > > > I think all the requests should use TCP by default unless explicitly told > > to use QUIC by some flag. If we get "Alternate-Protocol: 123:quic" > > The Alt-Svc header tells the client that the service exists somewhere else, > possibly using another protocol (like HTTP-over-quic, hq), so yes. > > > in response header we should inform the user, close TCP connection and > use > > QUIC instead. > > *Ideally* you'd try to setup the QUIC connection in the background or in > parallel since it may not work and then it is a good idea to keep using the > initial TCP connection... > > > It isn't specified formally on wiki page, but I think we should be able > to > > communicate with HTTP using QUIC protocol. Is there something more to it? > > You might learn that the implementations are not yet 100% there, so > speaking > full HTTP over QUIC is a bit shaky but should be in a better shape by the > summer. (Most implementations so far have stuck to "HTTP/0.9" over QUIC for > simplicity and early interop, but this situation will of course not last.) > > -- > > / daniel.haxx.se >
