« Previous 1 2 3 4

HTTP/1.1 versus HTTP/2 and HTTP/3

Turboboost

Long Path to the Browsers

Servers must do more than understand QUIC, so it follows that the clients also need to support HTTP/3. Because QUIC originates from Google, it is no surprise that Chrome already supports QUIC. Firefox also started offering experimental support in version 72 according to the definition published by the IETF. Microsoft Edge, which is now based on the open source Chromium project, has started the implementation work, which is currently available through Microsoft Edge Insider Canary Channel [6].

Conclusions

Today's standard for delivering web pages and applications is clearly HTTP/2. It solves the most serious problem of HTTP/1.1 – the HTTP head-of-line blocking – which required a client to wait until a request it had made was completed before it could make the next one. This bottleneck in turn caused massive delays, because today's web pages no longer comprise just a handful of files but load a huge volume of additional data. Administrators don't have to go to great lengths to get HTTP/2 up and running. Meanwhile, HTTP/3 is now in the starting blocks and brings with it the change from TCP to QUIC.

Infos

  1. RFC 2616: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2616
  2. Host Header as per RFC 7230, section 5.4: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7230#section-5.4
  3. HTTP/2.0 as per RFC 7540: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7540
  4. HTTP/2 historical use: https://w3techs.com/technologies/history_overview/site_element/all/y
  5. Google QUIC draft: https://quicwg.org/base-drafts/draft-ietf-quic-http.html
  6. Microsoft Edge Insider channel: https://www.microsoftedgeinsider.com/en-us/download

« Previous 1 2 3 4

Buy this article as PDF

Express-Checkout as PDF
Price $2.95
(incl. VAT)

Buy ADMIN Magazine

SINGLE ISSUES
Print Issues
Digital Issues
 
SUBSCRIPTIONS
Print Subs
Digisubs
 
TABLET & SMARTPHONE APPS
Get it on Google Play

US / Canada

Get it on Google Play

UK / Australia

Related content

comments powered by Disqus