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: email@example.com 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