quic

Perhaps, but: There's ongoing work exploring QUIC-in-kernel-space at https://github.com/lxin/quic, and more generally HTTP/3 will be increasingly optimized over time as it moves towards becoming the majority of HTTP traffic (a few years off, but looks likely eventually). There's no fundamental reason I'm aware of that HTTP/3 would be _inevitably_ slower than HTTP/2, it seems likely for now that it's largely implementation details. There's plenty of internet-facing cases with average-at-best connectivity where HTTP/3 would be beneficial today, and isn't available (non-megacorp Android apps, CLI tools, IoT, desktop apps, etc). Even on the backend, it's very common to have connections between datacenters with significant latency (e.g. distributed CDN to central application server/database).

> I'd far rather have the OS provide a verified safe socket layer There is work going on right now[1] to implement the QUIC protocol in the linux kernel, which gets used in userspace via standard socket() APIs like you would with TCP. Of course, who knows if it’ll ultimately get merged in. [1] https://github.com/lxin/quic

> I look at this article and consider the result pretty much as expected. Why? Because it pushes the flow control out of the kernel (and possibly network adapters) into userspace. TCP has flow-control and sequencing. QUICK makes you manage that yourself (sort of). I truly hope the QUIC in Linux Kernel project [0] succeeds. I'm not looking forward to linking big HTTP/3 libraries to all applications. [0] https://github.com/lxin/quic

For reference, the code lives at https://github.com/lxin/quic

There's a work in progress for kernel support: https://github.com/lxin/quic