[Banou]

I think one of the reasons Google choose UDP is that it's already a popular protocol, on which you can build reliable packets, while also having the base UDP unreliability on the side.

From my perspective, which is a web developer's, having QUIC, allowed the web standards to easily piggy back on top of it for the Webtransport API, which is ways better than the current HTTP stack and WebRTC which is a complete mess. Basically giving a TCP and UDP implementation for the web.

Knowing this, I feel like it makes more sense to me why Google choose this way of doing, which some people seem to be criticizing.

[simoncion]

> I think one of the reasons Google choose UDP is that it's already a popular protocol...

If you want your packets to reliably travel fairly unmolested between you and an effectively-randomly-chosen-peer on The Greater Internet, you have two transport protocol choices: TCP/IP or UDP/IP.

If you don't want the connection-management & etc that TCP/IP does for you, then you have exactly one choice.

> ...which some people seem to be criticizing.

People are criticizing the fact that on LAN link speeds (and fast (for the US) home internet speeds) QUIC is no better than (and sometimes worse than) previous HTTP transport protocols, despite the large amount of effort put into it.

It also seems that some folks are suggesting that Google could have put that time and effort into improving Linux's packet-handling code and (presumably) getting that into both Android and mainline Linux.