I've heard the difference is larger on cellular networks with packet loss but haven't seen examples.
What we need more than HTTP/3 is ESNI. Exposed server names are a real security risk.
ESNI is totally unrelated. People can work on more than one thing.
Most wireless protocols hide packet loss from upper layers anyways using retry/FEC. I can't think of a common situation where wireless packet loss is even visible to layer 4, so efforts to build tolerance to it are usually pointless
> Most wireless protocols hide packet loss from upper layers anyways using retry/FEC. I can't think of a common situation where wireless packet loss is even visible to layer 4, so efforts to build tolerance to it are usually pointless
Its attempting to build tolerance to sudden transient latency spikes interacting badly with congestion control algorithms. You can hide packet loss, you can't hide some random packet taking a lot longer to be delivered due to having to be retried.
Good point. By using UDP you can get around head-of-line blocking. I didn't consider that