Hi Willy,

Sorry to bother you, just a quick question if I may.

Does support for QUIC imply we'd have rudimentary UDP support as well
or is it only going to support QUIC Protocol?

Aaron West

Loadbalancer.org Ltd.


+1 888 867 9504 / +44 (0)330 380 1064


On 15 October 2017 at 18:02, Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu> wrote:
> Hi Sander,
> On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 04:27:15PM +0200, Sander Klein wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I haven't been paying much attention to the list lately, but I am wondering
>> what the current status of http/2 support is in 1.8-(dev|snapshot).
>> Is it in a usable-but-needs testing state? Or more like
>> stay-away-because-it-kills-kittens state?
> The code I posted was not merged because it was experimental and I was
> not satisfied with what the architecture would look like in the long
> term. So I kept it handy "just in case" but didn't want to merge it.
> Now after several failed attempts and with a lot of design sessions
> with my coworkers, I've made a good progress on a totally different
> approach which will later allow us to implement HTTP/2 on both sides,
> as well as implement support for QUIC. I have not merged anything yet
> because as I'm picking code from the first implementation, I regularly
> encounter obstacles that I need to overcome and this leads to lots of
> rebases to keep only bisectable code. The good point is that the code
> that finally settles there is much better and contains much less hacks.
> If anyone is interested, I can publish a work-in-progress branch once
> in a while, but for now the code in this branch only supports establishing
> a connection and exchanging PING frames, so that's totally useless, which
> is why I've not considered publishing it for now :-/
> If everything goes well, the final rebased and cleaned up code should
> be available for a release candidate by the end of the month.
> Stay tuned!
> Willy

Reply via email to