Hi Manu.

Even I agree with you to the point that HAProxy should be able to handle this 
next upcomming/available technology, I'm not sure if it's really a benefit for 
us, the enduser.

The future will show it :-)

As I don't want to bother all members on the list with this topic, let's 
discuss it  further off the list, if you like.

Regads aleks


-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
Von: Emmanuel Hocdet <m...@gandi.net>
Gesendet: 12. November 2018 18:44:40 MEZ
An: Aleksandar Lazic <al-hapr...@none.at>
CC: haproxy@formilux.org
Betreff: Re: HTTP/3 | daniel.haxx.se


Hi Aleks,

> Le 12 nov. 2018 à 18:02, Aleksandar Lazic <al-hapr...@none.at> a écrit :
> 
> Hi Manu.
> 
> Am 12.11.2018 um 16:19 schrieb Emmanuel Hocdet:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> The primary (major) step should be to deal with QUIC transport (over UDP).
>> At the same level as TCP for haproxy?
>> Willy should already have a little idea on it ;-)
> 
> Is then the conclusion for that that haproxy will be able to proxy/load 
> balance UDP?

The only conclusion is that haproxy should be able to proxy QUIC.
From wiki: «  QUIC, Quick UDP Internet Connections, aims to be nearly 
equivalent to an independent TCP 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmission_Control_Protocol> connection »
It could be see as TCP/2, the connection part is provided by the application. 
For example,  the congestion avoidance algorithms
must be provide into the application space at both endpoints.
A very cool feature is that QUIC can support IP migration.

++
Manu



Reply via email to