To address this, I’d like to suggest that – after coordination with the HTTP WG – we rename our the HTTP document to “HTTP/3”, and using the final ALPN token “h3”. Doing so clearly identifies it as another binding of HTTP semantics to the wire protocol – just as HTTP/2 did – so people understand its separation from QUIC.
Isnt QUIC supposed to be a semi-successor of TCP? So they admit defeat to HTTP as universal protocol now?!
Not sure about that wouldn’t there be 2 development paths
- HTTP/2 > HTTP/3 etc
- QUIC > QUIC/2 > QUIC/3 etc
or isn’t there anything more to add to HTTP/2 to worth using HTTP/3 as it’s successor ?
The protocol that’s been called HTTP-over-QUIC for quite some time has now changed name and will officially become HTTP/3 .
This topic was automatically closed after 30 days. New replies are no longer allowed.