[Ralith]

> There is no support for datagrams, just datastreams.

Datagrams can be easily and effectively encoded as discrete short-lived streams. If you need streams of datagrams, you can encode your own header to do that. I see no reason why this has to be built into the protocol when the provided primitives are sufficient.

> Forward error correction is actually cool but just using XOR is too limited.

Pretty sure FEC was removed from the IETF draft.

[Luker88]

> Datagrams can be easily and effectively encoded as discrete short-lived streams. If you need streams of datagrams, you can encode your own header to do that. I see no reason why this has to be built into the protocol when the provided primitives are sufficient.

Using discrete short-lived streams could mean a little more trouble understanding which message was in response to which other message. A stream of datagrams is already a logic container. But I gues you could track that by hand, too.

Maybe I just found an easier way to implement all of that on the protocol, so I don't see why QUIC could not. Maybe it's just something that I always end up doing by hand so I would just be happier if was provided. I mean, IP/UDP already has all the primitives I need, but it's not like everyone likes to reinvent the wheel.

> > Forward error correction is actually cool but just using XOR is too limited.

> Pretty sure FEC was removed from the IETF draft.

Yes, did not know about that. A pity, my experiments with proper FEC showed wonders after a minimum packet loss rate was surpassed. Even better on high-latencies.