I think you're seriously underestimating the number of systems that will be forced to deal with HTTP/3 if it's standardized. These days nearly everything uses HTTP. Changing HTTP is almost as big as adding another option to TCP/UDP
Everything that touches HTTP connections. Proxies, transparent proxies, web application firewalls, every network analysis and debugging tool, layer 7 load balancers.
There's probably half a million hardware firewalls out there that won't ever get a software update. As soon as http/3 is released, they're useless. The ones that can be upgraded need downtime and people time to do so. Just in firewalls this change could cost 400 million.
Realistically, the consequences of HTTP/3 will cost billions. Is 4% faster speed worth that? There's a lot of other ways to increase speed 4% without spending any money. Like turning on profile guided optimization in the browser, or just waiting a year for CPU and network speeds to increase that much.
I'm not being defeatist here, a maximum of 4% performance increase is just not very good. Nobody would switch a video or audio codec for a few percent, why is HTTP considered easier?
I say to Google: come back with something better. 20-30%? Totally worth it. If HTTP/2 is truly within 4% of optimal we should never touch it again
Everything that touches HTTP connections. Proxies, transparent proxies, web application firewalls, every network analysis and debugging tool, layer 7 load balancers.
There's probably half a million hardware firewalls out there that won't ever get a software update. As soon as http/3 is released, they're useless. The ones that can be upgraded need downtime and people time to do so. Just in firewalls this change could cost 400 million.
Realistically, the consequences of HTTP/3 will cost billions. Is 4% faster speed worth that? There's a lot of other ways to increase speed 4% without spending any money. Like turning on profile guided optimization in the browser, or just waiting a year for CPU and network speeds to increase that much.
I'm not being defeatist here, a maximum of 4% performance increase is just not very good. Nobody would switch a video or audio codec for a few percent, why is HTTP considered easier?
I say to Google: come back with something better. 20-30%? Totally worth it. If HTTP/2 is truly within 4% of optimal we should never touch it again