Opened 2 years ago
Closed 2 years ago
#2360 closed enhancement (wontfix)
Add Support to HTTP/3
| Reported by: | anonymous maybe | Owned by: | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | minor | Milestone: | undecided |
| Component: | api/utils | Version: | 0.9.37 |
| Keywords: | Cc: | ||
| Parent Tickets: | Sensitive: | no |
Description
HTTP/3 is the coming new HTTP version that uses QUIC for transport!
More:
Subtickets
Change History (4)
comment:1 Changed 2 years ago by
| Type: | defect → enhancement |
|---|
comment:2 Changed 2 years ago by
| Status: | new → infoneeded_new |
|---|
comment:3 Changed 2 years ago by
| Status: | infoneeded_new → new |
|---|
put support in eepget for clearnet?
yes
Why?
Because of
The QUIC Working Group in the IETF works on creating the QUIC transport protocol. QUIC is a TCP replacement done over UDP. Originally, QUIC was started as an effort by Google and then more of a “HTTP/2-encrypted-over-UDP” protocol.
It’s HTTP over QUIC. QUIC is a reliable transport. That happens to use UDP.
comment:4 Changed 2 years ago by
| Component: | unspecified → api/utils |
|---|---|
| Resolution: | → wontfix |
| Status: | new → closed |
We aren't going to write our own code, or add a 3rd-party library, for this. The benefits are marginal at best. We only use clearnet for reseeding. You didn't give us any reasons in your comment above, other than QUIC exists and is "reliable". That's not nearly enough.
If Java adds support we could possibly enable it. Java is fairly slow to add things, though. For example, they won't have full support for TLSv1.3 until Java 13. On that timetable, I don't think we'll see anything for years.
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
Where would we support this? Via the proxy? You have any references on how to do proxy support?
Or, put support in eepget for clearnet? Why?
What's the point, why would we do this?