Talk about HTTP/2, how it has been deployed, did it meet its promises and how QUIC is going to attempt to fix some of the remaining issues. Held in FOSDEM at Febyrar 2017.
17. The remote corners of Internet
Percentile Desktop Mobile
5 1 11
25 20 44
50 79 94
75 194 184
95 800 913
Milliseconds RTT
18. Queuing time h1 vs h2
(Time waiting internally to send off a HTTP request)
Percentile HTTP 1 HTTP 2
80 100 ms 2 ms
95 2000 ms 16 ms
>100ms: H1 20%, H2 3%
25. A non-blocking TCP + TLS + HTTP/2
Needs independent packets
… that still are stream aware
Needs new retransmissions/ACKs
New protocol?
Fixing TCP takes decades –
if even doable
26. QUIC
“TCP”, TLS and HTTP/2 over UDP
no TCP head of line blocking
other congestion control
move across interfaces
“TCP improvements” - much faster
Google has this widely deployed already
UDP not as problematic as we thought
27. Packet loss, hey?
IP
UDP UDP UDP UDP UDP UDP
quic quic quic quic quic quic
TLS TLS TLS TLS TLS TLS
h2 h2 h2 h2 h2 h2
IP IP IP IP IP IP
28. The IETF QUIC wg
Just started
Massive interest
s/custom crypto/TLS 1.3
Will transfer more than HTTP/2 frames
First interim meeting in Tokyo in Jan ‘17
IETF-QUIC vs Google-QUIC
Maybe early live test around mid-2017
That meansThat means
maybemaybe andand
earlyearly teststests
29. Neither 3 nor 2
Perhaps “HTTP/3”, but not in name
Perhaps “TCP/2”, but not in name
Just QUIC
30. Round-up
HTTP/1 is not optimal
HTTP/2 is binary and multipled
HTTP/2 is widely used
HTTP/2 makes sites faster
(IETF-)QUIC is coming
QUIC is HTTP/2 frames over UDP