2017-10-15 23:43 GMT+05:00 Willy Tarreau <w...@1wt.eu>: > On Sun, Oct 15, 2017 at 07:16:51PM +0100, Aaron West wrote: > > 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? > > It will be UDP for QUIC only. > > Do you have a *valid* use case for UDP proxying ? I'm asking because every > time people ask for UDP support, it's for totally stupid reasons like NFS, > for non-proxyable protocols, for protocols which are designed not to need > a load balancer (eg: DNS) or for trivial stuff that is already naturally > handled by their operating system (eg: done by LVS). That's why I'm > interested in knowing about a valid case ;-) >
dns is valid case, openvpn comes to mind also, but need to look carefully with switching between two or more servers. I'd say, udp balancing is tricky (thre's no syn/ack), so let us stick to QUIC > > Cheers, > Willy > >
