[Bloat] Google's QUIC has reached NANOG

[Bloat] Google's QUIC has reached NANOG

[Hal Murray]

Google making the Web faster with protocol that reduces round trips
http://tinyurl.com/prsvb4z
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/06/google-making-the-web-fa
ster-with-protocol-that-reduces-round-trips/

http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/
http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2013-June/059526.html

Seems likely to be a noisy thread.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

Re: [Bloat] Google's QUIC has reached NANOG

[Justin Andrusk]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 737 bytes --]

So am I the only one concerned that they are looking to use udp instead of
tcp?
On Jun 28, 2013 5:55 PM, "Hal Murray" <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> wrote:

>
> Google making the Web faster with protocol that reduces round trips
> http://tinyurl.com/prsvb4z
>
> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/06/google-making-the-web-fa
> ster-with-protocol-that-reduces-round-trips/
>
> http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/
> http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/2013-June/059526.html
>
> Seems likely to be a noisy thread.
>
>
> --
> These are my opinions.  I hate spam.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1555 bytes --]

Re: [Bloat] Google's QUIC has reached NANOG

[Bruce Atherton]

On 28/06/2013 3:05 PM, Justin Andrusk wrote:
>
> So am I the only one concerned that they are looking to use udp 
> instead of tcp?
>
>

It is an important part of the design. They want to multiplex streams 
into a single connection, and ordered packets means one lost packet in 
one stream holds up all the streams. Only way around that is with 
something other than TCP right now. This is a major downside of 
multiplexing SPDY over using multiple connections, which I believe was 
one of the prime motivators to develop QUIC.

In the FAQ, they mention that they are hoping once they get a good 
design in QUIC some of its ideas can be moved into TCP. Someday.

Re: [Bloat] Google's QUIC has reached NANOG

[Dave Taht]

The design document is a very valuable read. Tons of good ideas in there...

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RNHkx_VvKWyWg6Lr8SZ-saqsQx7rFV-ev2jRFUoVD34/preview?sle=true

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Bruce Atherton <bruce@callenish.com> wrote:
> On 28/06/2013 3:05 PM, Justin Andrusk wrote:
>>
>>
>> So am I the only one concerned that they are looking to use udp instead of
>> tcp?
>>
>>
>
> It is an important part of the design. They want to multiplex streams into a
> single connection, and ordered packets means one lost packet in one stream
> holds up all the streams. Only way around that is with something other than
> TCP right now. This is a major downside of multiplexing SPDY over using
> multiple connections, which I believe was one of the prime motivators to
> develop QUIC.
>
> In the FAQ, they mention that they are hoping once they get a good design in
> QUIC some of its ideas can be moved into TCP. Someday.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat



-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html

Re: [Bloat] Google's QUIC has reached NANOG

[Jim Gettys]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1697 bytes --]

I'm a fan of minion, myself. (along with ccn, in the revolutionary
category).

http://csweb1.fandm.edu/jiyengar/papers/minion-pfldnet2010.pdf

Jim



On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:19 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> The design document is a very valuable read. Tons of good ideas in there...
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RNHkx_VvKWyWg6Lr8SZ-saqsQx7rFV-ev2jRFUoVD34/preview?sle=true
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 4:17 PM, Bruce Atherton <bruce@callenish.com>
> wrote:
> > On 28/06/2013 3:05 PM, Justin Andrusk wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> So am I the only one concerned that they are looking to use udp instead
> of
> >> tcp?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > It is an important part of the design. They want to multiplex streams
> into a
> > single connection, and ordered packets means one lost packet in one
> stream
> > holds up all the streams. Only way around that is with something other
> than
> > TCP right now. This is a major downside of multiplexing SPDY over using
> > multiple connections, which I believe was one of the prime motivators to
> > develop QUIC.
> >
> > In the FAQ, they mention that they are hoping once they get a good
> design in
> > QUIC some of its ideas can be moved into TCP. Someday.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Bloat mailing list
> > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Täht
>
> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
> http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html
> _______________________________________________
> Bloat mailing list
> Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3221 bytes --]