Re: Google's QUIC

["Octavio Alvarez" <alvarezp () alvarezp ods org>]

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 13:09:43 -0700, Michael Thomas <mike () mtcc com> wrote:

> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/06/google-making-the-web-faster-with-protocol-that-reduces-round-trips/?comments=1
>
> Sorry if this is a little more on the dev side, and less on the ops side  
> but since
> it's Google, it will almost certainly affect the ops side eventually.
>
> My first reaction to this was why not SCTP, but apparently they think  
> that middle
> boxen/firewalls make it problematic. That may be, but UDP based port  
> filtering is
> probably not far behind on the flaky front.

Sounds like a UDP replacement. If this is true, then OS-level support will
be needed. If they are on this, then it's the perfect opportunity to fix
some other problems with the Internet in general.

My reaction is: why, oh why, repeat the same mistake of merging everything
on the transport layer and let the benefits be protocol-specific instead
of separating the "transport" from "session".

I mean, why not let redundancy and multipath stay on the transport layer
through some kind of end-user transport (like the Host Identification
Protocol, RFC 5201) and let a simpler TCP and UDP live on top of that, on
the session layer.

Streamline the protocols and separate their functionality.

It's easier than it sounds.


--
Octavio.