Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 10:48 AM Eric Covener wrote: > On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 11:20 AM Helmut K. C. Tessarek > wrote: > > > > On 2019-09-27 03:00, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > > I know of no plans to implement HTTP/3 support in Apache httpd. > > > > I'm sorry, but this seems rather strange to me. So what's the idea > behind this > > decision (or better said the lack of a plan)? > It's helpful to understand the nature of the ASF. We are always an incubator of great solutions written in code. But there is no ombudsman, no dictates which direct projects to do X, Y or Z when it comes to the code that our projects create. No demands of implementing features, etc. Everything that someone steps up to offer end up right here for discussion on dev@. There is no planning cabul, or even budget to put this on some coders to accomplish. You certainly can add an enhancement request on our bugzilla tracker to suggest this, but it is on some motivated party to bring the development effort to the table. > HTTP/3 would be a lot of work, a lot of shoehorning into HTTPD, and > likely be de-stabilizing for quite some time. There is > simply nobody (seemingly) working on it. > > HTTPD is great and familiar to lots of people, but HTTPD'S age brings > a lot of baggage. Lots of other great servers have much > less baggage and currently have much more commercial interest and buzz. > And it is engineered as an http/1 server. While we can now (with all props to Stefan and Tatsuhiro) claim http/2, we don't have the framework to really offer great h2 push support and other architecture required for long-lived dynamic request pipelines. http/2 and http/3 offer server-originated transactions that httpd never anticipated. That would be an entirely new module which both mod_http2 and mod_http3 would want to build on, and an entirely new definition of the CGI spec and related modules. So we "speak" http/2 now, and might speak http/3 sooner or later with Google's quiche or some other provider. But the server isn't constructed to be attentive to both the client's traffic demands and the backend's desire to push unsolicited traffic. That would be a fun chasm for some coders to jump, and we would welcome them here.
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
Although I should had made a few things clear, seems some good discussion happened. Amongst the same lines: When I asked about Apache, I should had stated HTTPD. There is a QUIC implementation on Apache.org under ATS (Apache Traffic Server), a reverse proxy, load balancer daemon. While definitely an interesting approach that takes a ton of overhead from the web server, it adds much more than “just a mod_h3” to be maintained. Not that a mod_h3 wouldn’t be enough work to be maintained. A motivator for the implementation is the continuity and evolution of the web we all know and rely on, which this very ancient dinosaur daemon helped to build and solidify. Apache may or may not have the largest market share amongst HTTP servers anymore, but it does not means it is stuck in time. As of h2, h3 is another evolution that should be looked at, when the time is right. And while all is well said, it needs done. I too agree it might be a fun project for anyone with enough time, motivation and skills to do so. I fall short on at least one of these, so as much as the enthusiast of me would love to turn it on at my systems, I’m yet to remember how to code anything other than a bash script or minor automation tools in pre-made, 3rd party Python modules. Besides, h3 is not a full formal standard yet, so while it is showing signs it will be some day, it might be as QUIC is/was for a while before it settles up as standard. But it never hurt to be checked out. Last but not least, thanks Stefan for your h2 work. Alex > On Sep 27, 2019, at 17:12, Helmut K. C. Tessarek wrote: > > On 2019-09-27 11:47, Eric Covener wrote: >> I don't think market share is a big motivating factor for active >> contributors. > > Maybe not, but I remember a discussion a while back on this list that had to > do with features vs stability, about market shares and why other web servers > are gaining. > >> HTTP/3 would be a lot of work, a lot of shoehorning into HTTPD, and >> likely be de-stabilizing for quite some time. There is >> simply nobody (seemingly) working on it. > > I get that, I was simply saying that I didn't understand why there wasn't a > plan. That's all. > I also do understand that this might be a highly complex topic, especially > since it will touch many components. > I'm very grateful that Stefan took the initiative to get h2 into httpd. > >> HTTPD is great and familiar to lots of people, but HTTPD'S age brings >> a lot of baggage. Lots of other great servers have much >> less baggage and currently have much more commercial interest and buzz. > > I've been using Apache httpd since the early days and I won't be switching to > another web server. But the "baggage" can't be the reason for stagnation. A > web server's main functionality is to serve web pages. If the protocol evolves > so must the server, otherwise the server will be obsolete at one point in the > future. > > Cheers, > K. C. > > -- > regards Helmut K. C. Tessarek KeyID 0x172380A011EF4944 > Key fingerprint = 8A55 70C1 BD85 D34E ADBC 386C 1723 80A0 11EF 4944 > > /* > Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for chaos and madness > await thee at its end. > */ >
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
> I'm very grateful that Stefan took the initiative to get h2 into httpd. +1
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
On 2019-09-27 11:47, Eric Covener wrote: > I don't think market share is a big motivating factor for active contributors. Maybe not, but I remember a discussion a while back on this list that had to do with features vs stability, about market shares and why other web servers are gaining. > HTTP/3 would be a lot of work, a lot of shoehorning into HTTPD, and > likely be de-stabilizing for quite some time. There is > simply nobody (seemingly) working on it. I get that, I was simply saying that I didn't understand why there wasn't a plan. That's all. I also do understand that this might be a highly complex topic, especially since it will touch many components. I'm very grateful that Stefan took the initiative to get h2 into httpd. > HTTPD is great and familiar to lots of people, but HTTPD'S age brings > a lot of baggage. Lots of other great servers have much > less baggage and currently have much more commercial interest and buzz. I've been using Apache httpd since the early days and I won't be switching to another web server. But the "baggage" can't be the reason for stagnation. A web server's main functionality is to serve web pages. If the protocol evolves so must the server, otherwise the server will be obsolete at one point in the future. Cheers, K. C. -- regards Helmut K. C. Tessarek KeyID 0x172380A011EF4944 Key fingerprint = 8A55 70C1 BD85 D34E ADBC 386C 1723 80A0 11EF 4944 /* Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for chaos and madness await thee at its end. */ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
> HTTPD is great and familiar to lots of people, but HTTPD'S age brings > a lot of baggage. Lots of other great servers have much > less baggage and currently have much more commercial interest and buzz. For a short time my employer talked about "two-speed IT" to frame how different products address needs of existing projects vs. new ones. The language is kind of replaced by e.g. "cloud native" but it still kind of useful way to contrast some of these things. -- Eric Covener cove...@gmail.com
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 11:20 AM Helmut K. C. Tessarek wrote: > > On 2019-09-27 03:00, Stefan Eissing wrote: > > I know of no plans to implement HTTP/3 support in Apache httpd. > > I'm sorry, but this seems rather strange to me. So what's the idea behind this > decision (or better said the lack of a plan)? > > "Let's wait until other web servers implement it and wonder why they are > gaining more market share?" > > I'm not mocking anyone, this is a honest question. My 2c: I don't think market share is a big motivating factor for active contributors. HTTP/3 would be a lot of work, a lot of shoehorning into HTTPD, and likely be de-stabilizing for quite some time. There is simply nobody (seemingly) working on it. HTTPD is great and familiar to lots of people, but HTTPD'S age brings a lot of baggage. Lots of other great servers have much less baggage and currently have much more commercial interest and buzz.
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
On 2019-09-27 10:40, William A Rowe Jr wrote: > This answer \V/ (from Stefan) below. More explanation follows... Thanks Bill, your explanation certainly helped to shed some light on this. Cheers, K. C. -- regards Helmut K. C. Tessarek KeyID 0x172380A011EF4944 Key fingerprint = 8A55 70C1 BD85 D34E ADBC 386C 1723 80A0 11EF 4944 /* Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for chaos and madness await thee at its end. */ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
On 2019-09-27 03:00, Stefan Eissing wrote: > I know of no plans to implement HTTP/3 support in Apache httpd. I'm sorry, but this seems rather strange to me. So what's the idea behind this decision (or better said the lack of a plan)? "Let's wait until other web servers implement it and wonder why they are gaining more market share?" I'm not mocking anyone, this is a honest question. I also don't understand the statement: > I think there are plenty resources online where you can find an answer to > your question. (as an answer to "What’s the incentive to add it? ") In fact a web search does not yield any useful results. Furthermore the OP most likely meant "what incentive would be required to add it". Cheers, K. C. -- regards Helmut K. C. Tessarek KeyID 0x172380A011EF4944 Key fingerprint = 8A55 70C1 BD85 D34E ADBC 386C 1723 80A0 11EF 4944 /* Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer for chaos and madness await thee at its end. */ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
This answer \V/ (from Stefan) below. More explanation follows... The httpd project is entirely transparent. All development decisions occur on the email list you asked this question. Stefan himself stepped up to integrate Tatsuhiro's nghttp2 implementation into httpd (very successfully) so we have mod_http2 as a core module. Something similar may happen where someone creates a mod_quic (google obviously hasn't shared such a thing, according to google search) or someone integrates the readily available implementations. We'll see, the Apache HTTP Server project is very welcoming of new community members who offer innovations like this (again using the example of Stefan, who quickly became a committer and PMC member after bringing the mod_h2 proposal to the project.) The troublesome part is that both HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 get ahead of their skis by being L4-L7 protocols, where HTTP/1 is L7. The httpd server was designed to be an OSI Layer 7 component. Stefan's done some great work breaking that design model to have mod_http2 "fit" right in, but it's an uneasy fit. Now HTTP/3 offers some very serious advantages, and the project was offered some fun HTTP-over-UDP transport work over a decade ago. But any HTTP3/quic component swaps out tls+mod_ssl+http+http2 work for an new and better approach to TLS handshake negotiation and transport. It's going to be a fun development project for someone perhaps. AFAIK no-one has expressed interest. But to anyone who has an interest, even if you want to take such a project online, please share with dev@httpd that you are chasing the idea and maybe you'll find a great collaborator or few to bring a great proposal back to the project, once you decide it's ready for submission. Cheers, Bill On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 2:00 AM Stefan Eissing wrote: > I know of no plans to implement HTTP/3 support in Apache httpd. > > > Am 26.09.2019 um 19:54 schrieb Alex Hautequest : > > > > > https://news.slashdot.org/story/19/09/26/1710239/cloudflare-google-chrome-and-firefox-add-http3-support > > > > With that, the obvious question: what about Apache? > >
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
I think there are plenty resources online where you can find an answer to your question. > Am 27.09.2019 um 09:18 schrieb Mark Blackman : > > >> On 26 Sep 2019, at 18:54, Alex Hautequest wrote: >> >> https://news.slashdot.org/story/19/09/26/1710239/cloudflare-google-chrome-and-firefox-add-http3-support >> >> With that, the obvious question: what about Apache? > > What’s the incentive to add it? > > > - Mark
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
> On 26 Sep 2019, at 18:54, Alex Hautequest wrote: > > https://news.slashdot.org/story/19/09/26/1710239/cloudflare-google-chrome-and-firefox-add-http3-support > > With that, the obvious question: what about Apache? What’s the incentive to add it? - Mark
Re: Cloudflare, Google Chrome, and Firefox Add HTTP/3 Support
I know of no plans to implement HTTP/3 support in Apache httpd. > Am 26.09.2019 um 19:54 schrieb Alex Hautequest : > > https://news.slashdot.org/story/19/09/26/1710239/cloudflare-google-chrome-and-firefox-add-http3-support > > With that, the obvious question: what about Apache?
