hpvd

detail comparison for the first element: of course, measured latency also depends on the distance: browser - server/datacenter but the structure is different between http/1.1 with TSLv1.2 and http/2.0 with...

sorry for spamming (->maybe moving from issues to discussions?), but this may be interesting?! regarding using http/3 and "fallback" to http/2 to support all browsers: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61172217/does-http3-quic-fall-back-to-tls-1-2-if-the-browser-doesnt-support-quic and a minimal server...

good to read that there were some interesting points included :-) just some advertising for 3 tiny tools: When working in these field and using firefox, there are three addons...

examples: using these tools one easily stumble across - your website uses http 1.1 (leads to this issue...) - the gif on the editor page seems to be the only...

just another thought on relying on 2 different connection types (http and ws): you have to take care for security and abuse of 2 different stacks. Stumbled across this topic...

very interesting details and background. I'm not sure regarding the fallback and workaround described in [1] from 2012. Maybe modern browsers (2022) would throttle tabs/connection in background aggressively to save...

just looked through the linked sources again: **http/2 seems to support full bidi streaming, so there seems to be no latency disadvantages (no need for ajax)** as far as I...

hmm does this work? > After the connection is opened, the server can't initiate a regular stream, only a push stream. But once the client opens a stream by sending...

some more background on http/2 bidi streaming: https://web.dev/performance-http2/#streams-messages-and-frames

so far so good :-) hmm - is there nothing one could take from mentioned above sources 7, 6 and 5?