HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
w3c
p2p-webtransport
HTML2022–2026
w3c / p2p-webtransport · Archived

p2p-webtransport

Interface to create and manage QUIC streams

Networking
Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
3Distinct people
9Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
183GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Interface to create and manage QUIC streams

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year9 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2022-06-06 23:26:13 UTC to 2026-05-16 06:27:46 UTC.

01232022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments20222023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments20242025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 3 mentions; 0 submissions, 3 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC303
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

9 sources
jauntywundrkind·May 16, 2026
I came in a bit skeptical that MoQ was getting strong concensus in how to do it. MoQ definitely seems wildly ascendant in general but I was assuming it was still kind of dispersed in effort. But wow, some really neat drafts (many quite early). I was losing steam by the end... I'd love a matrix of which of these awesome MoQ projects support which drafts. That's where I want to see the concensus. This feels like it is for sure happening. Lovely to see. How big the concensus as to how One small reservation: I really wish webtransport p2p was still alive. Webrtc is still the net's only real p2p technology. That's really a shame. https://github.com/w3c/p2p-webtransport
In Consensus on a MOQ Media Layer Player Framework Should Speed Market Adoption
jauntywundrkind·Oct 7, 2025
Thankfully the web is quite stable generally. It would be extremely bad for a lot of people to remove webrtc & directly against the stability the web offers: I highly doubt it's gonna get removed. That it is the only technology for p2p connection on the web is definitely a very special very different twist from everything else. Yeah that has a little more "risk" but I seriously don't see anyone trying to remove it. Ideally webrtc wouldn't be the only way to do p2p across the web. It was super exciting when p2p webtransport showed up as an idea, but it's been inactive for a while now. Ideally we could get rid of weirdo protocols like webrtc's SCTP and focus on the new good stuff like QUIC, that webtransport uses! https://github.com/w3c/p2p-webtransport
In Is everyone switching to MoQ from WebRTC?
jauntywundrkind·Nov 5, 2024
Local peer to peer? Please, just give us QUIC API for Peer-to-peer Connections https://github.com/w3c/p2p-webtransport and bring back Network Discovery https://www.w3.org/TR/discovery-api/ or something like it. Conflating a couple separate specs together for a single use case is bad. Keep specs lower level. P2p connectivity should be a thing, unto itself. Local networking should be a thing. See also, direct socket API in Chrome 131, 5 days ago, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42022649
In Local Peer-to-Peer API Draft Community Group Report
jeffparsons·Sep 16, 2022
As a user of QUIC, I've found it to be pretty much everything I've been wanting for the last 20 years. Hopefully WebTransport can grow the features required (e.g. by stealing them from WebRTC) to make real P2P WebTransport possible. Edit: if I'm reading this correctly, then maybe there are already efforts underway to make this possible: https://github.com/w3c/p2p-webtransport
In Using WebTransport
rektide·Jun 6, 2022
> I just wish WebRTC wasn't so prescriptive of DTLS/SRTP. There was a webrtc-webtransport spec, but it got renamed/retasked to p2p-webtransport[1]. It got renamed/rebuild ~1 year ago[2]. Feels like a pretty strong indicator of webrtc being deconstructed, but whose to say this goes anywhere. We'd also need webcodecs. It's somewhat scary & also somewhat exciting thinking of the one good, working, browser supported standard being ripped into pieces (p2p-webtransport, webcodecs, more) & being user-implemented. Having the browser & servers have a well-known target is both great but also perhaps confining. If we leave it up to each site/library to DIY their solution, figure out how to balance the p2p feeds, it'll be a long long time before the Rest of the World (other than the very big few) have reasonable tech again. WebRTC is quite capable &
Read the rest
a nice even playing field, with lots of well-known rules to enable creative interopation. We'd be throwing away a lot. I'd hoped for webrtc-webtransport, to at least keep some order & regularity, but that seems out, at the moment. But Webrtc-nv is still ultra-formative; anything could happen. The rest of the transport stack is also undergoing massive seismic shifts. I feel like we're in for a lot of years of running QUIC or HTTP3 over WebRTC Data-Channels and over WebTransport, so we can explore solutions the new capabilities while not having to ram each & every change through with the browser implementers. It feels like a less visible but far more massive Web Extensibility Manifesto moment ("Browser vendors should provide new low-level capabilities that expose the possibilities of the underlying platform as closely as possible."), only at sub-HTML levels[3]. The browsers refused to let us play with HTTP Push, never let appdevs know realtime resources had been pushed at the browser, so we're still debating terrible WebSocket vs SSE choices; terrible. I think of gRPC-web & what an abomination that is, how sad & pointless that effort is; all because the browser is a mere glimmer of the underlying transport. I feel like a lot of experimentation & exploration is going to happen if we start exploring QUIC or HTTP3 over WebTransport. Attempts to reimagine alternatives to WebRTC are also possible if we had specs like p2p-webtransport, or just did QUIC over DataChannels. Running modern protocols in the client, not the browser, seems like a semi-cursed future, but necessary, at least for a while, while we don't yet know what we could do. The browsers are super laggy, slow to expose capabilities. [1] https://github.com/w3c/p2p-webtransport [2] https://github.com/w3c/p2p-webtransport/commit/63370be4bb61a... [3] https://github.com/extensibleweb/manifesto
In Video Live Streaming: Notes on RTMP, HLS, and WebRTC

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.