Open Lennie opened 10 years ago
Totally agreed somebody should get started on a UDP based transport like QUIC.
If I'm not mistake, there is only one implementation of QUIC that isn't enabled by default and no specification yet. Or at least no standardization process yet. So probably a bit early for that. :-)
But on the WebRTC datachannel front there are people (developers are CoreOS) that have already started on some code: https://github.com/coreos/go-webrtc-datachannel https://github.com/ccding/go-stun
So there was an interrest in doing that, but they stopped.
What is interresting about WebRTC is that is can do NAT traversal.
Yes, super early. Excited about CoreOS's datachannel work. Basically, I'm looking for a mid-level transport layer for Duplex: https://github.com/progrium/duplex/
I had considered also doing an HTTP2 transport layer for it... but for simplicity, since it needs to be implemented in C very soon, I think we'll just do our simple transport protocol. In the hopes that we can use libchan or something similar when available in C. I would try to help port libchan to C but it's probably too early and there are already many dependencies that would make it difficult.
I'm also happy to contribute my generic net/rpc server reflection code so that libchan can have net/rpc style interface on top of the low level req/rep API. There is a lot of overlap in all our work, so I hope we can figure out a way to collaborate and/or design them to work together. (For example, CoreOS's datachannel could be a libchan transport)
There are existing SPDY/HTTP2 implementations in C like https://github.com/tatsuhiro-t/nghttp2
Yeah, that's one of the big ones and luckily it's there. Anyway, can't wait for a port to C...
+1 for QUIC. This would make libchan usable in all high-bandwidth realtime apps, and p2p. (Note that TCP has issues in exposed networks, where anybody can forge RSTs).
If someone wants to participate in building a QUIC golang implementation then I think progress can be made on this issue. Otherwise I will close it for now and we can re-address when there is a finalized QUIC spec or golang implementation.
What's the status of it?
@sheerun if you know of any Go libraries implementing QUIC I would love to give it a try. Also feel free to advocate for an alternative. As it stands now most this specifications are still fluid and Go implementations are not there.
As I wasn't at the DockerCon I haven't heard how libchan is going to be used, but if multiple streams on top of these transports is a goal I suggest adding a datagram-based transport as well.
The reason is because of head-of-line blocking.
Obviously, HTTP/2 or SPDY is already better than HTTP/1.x or something like WebSocket at dealing with multiple streams.
But at the TCP level you can still get head-of-line blocking because if packets are lost they can not be reordered.
It's similar to the TCP tunneling in TCP problem: http://sites.inka.de/~W1011/devel/tcp-tcp.html
It is also (one of ?) the reasons https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QUIC is being developed.
An other example WebRTC which uses DTLS ('SSL'/TLS over UDP) at the lowerlevel and SCTP as the datachannel protocol for the multiplexing.
Obviously I wouldn't suggest implementing all of WebRTC, it's a pretty big specification.
But they are just examples of current protocols that already do this.