--- HTTP/3 is coming! And it won't use TCP! ---

A recent announcement reveals that HTTP - the protocol used by browsers to communicate with web servers - will get a major change in version 3!

Before, the HTTP protocols (version 1.0, 1.1 and 2.2) were all layered on top of TCP (Transmission Control Protocol).
TCP provides reliable, ordered, and error-checked delivery of data over an IP network.
It can handle hardware failures, timeouts, etc. and makes sure the data is received in the order it was transmitted in.
Also you can easily detect if any corruption during transmission has occurred.
All these features are necessary for a protocol such as HTTP, but TCP wasn't originally designed for HTTP!
It's a "one-size-fits-all" solution, suitable for *any* application that needs this kind of reliability.
TCP does a lot of round trips between the client and the server to make sure everybody receives their data. Especially if you're using SSL. This results in a high network latency.
So if we had a protocol which is basically designed for HTTP, it could help a lot at fixing all these problems.
This is the idea behind "QUIC", an experimental network protocol, originally created by Google, using UDP.

Now we all know how unreliable UDP is: You don't know if the data you sent was received nor does the receiver know if there is anything missing. Also, data is unordered, so if anything takes longer to send, it will most likely mix up with the other pieces of data. The only good part of UDP is its simplicity.
So why use this crappy thing for such an important protocol as HTTP?
Well, QUIC fixes all these problems UDP has, and provides the reliability of TCP but without introducing lots of round trips and a high latency! (How cool is that?)

The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has been working (or is still working) on a standardized version of QUIC, although it's very different from Google's original proposal.
The IETF also wants to create a version of HTTP that uses QUIC, previously referred to as HTTP-over-QUIC. HTTP-over-QUIC isn't, however, HTTP/2 over QUIC.
It's a new, updated version of HTTP built for QUIC.

Now, the chairman of both the HTTP working group and the QUIC working group for IETF, Mark Nottingham, wanted to rename HTTP-over-QUIC to HTTP/3, and it seems like his proposal got accepted!
So version 3 of HTTP will have QUIC as an essential, integral feature, and we can expect that it no longer uses TCP as its network protocol.

We will see how it turns out in the end, but I'm sure we will have to wait a couple more years for HTTP/3, when it has been thoroughly tested and integrated.

Thank you for reading!

function isTrueOrFalse(s) {
if (s == true) return true
If (s == false) return false
}

can anyone recommend a pair of reasonably priced over ear headphones that are still comfortable when wearing glasses? mine hurt my ears when I wear glasses with them lol

My views on the github/MS thingy.

I've had to explain in at least 20+ rants that some people might have legitimate reasons/opinions for disagreeing with this deal. I find it quite bad that I even have to say this but that aside for this rant.

Microsoft is a commercial company which does a lot for open source, that's a fact.

In my case, I mostly look at the part of Microsoft in regard to how they treat users and user privacy as this, in my opinion, shows for a great deal how trustworthy a company is.

It's publicly known that Microsoft joined the prism surveillance program in 2007 which in my opinion also meant selling out all users.
Next to that, through at least windows 10 it has done quite intrusive user tracking which I also see as a betrayal to its users.

I could go on and on about cases but I've made my point on at least microsoft.

As for github selling itself to Microsoft, this most likely means that it'll also be integrated within the prism network. That's my main point of concern as to why I disagree of this deal and have lost my trust in github for selling to a company which, imo, has absolutely no respect for its users' privacy and has ethics I entirely disagree with.

I still haven't formed an opinion on the rest of arguments out there as, due to a medical thing, I'm hardly able to focus right now.

You might agree or disagree, that's your very right and that's perfectly fine. Just don't say that I haven't come with an actual argument/opinion as for why I disagree with this deal.

Interviewing a potential candidate...

Me: So, how would you rate your JavaScript knowledge?

Him: Pretty good, although I still don't really understand prototypal inheritance.

Me: Yeah, it's hard to understand something which doesn't exist.

...let the flaming begin 😈