IPv6 QUIC traffic

Philipp Kern phil at philkern.de
Thu Jun 4 23:21:11 CEST 2015

On 2015-06-04 20:48, Ca By wrote:
> FYI, the QUIC people have been informed 2x that UDP is not safe and
> operators will rate limit it.
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/proto-quic/UDP/proto-quic/09L5YD2u5xU/EsZgXHJq0o4J
> https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!searchin/proto-quic/UDP/proto-quic/1tN6j-dErw0/3c7bEHQm2gMJ

Then evidence for this should turn up in the telemetry, you'd think. 
(Which in turn means overblocking or throttling in every network you 
control right now would convey your message better than "this might 
happen", when it's not visible.)

At this point adding new L4 protocols won't work either because of 
firewalls, router ACLs, CPEs and throttling. So it'd be out of the 
frying pan into the fire.

Given that there is Happy Eyeballs for this and there is a probably not 
too unreasonable fallback with HTTP/2, can't we just see how this plays 
out? ;-)

Kind regards
Philipp Kern

More information about the ipv6-ops mailing list