Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

WebTransport backend #251

Open
bonsairobo opened this issue Jul 3, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

WebTransport backend #251

bonsairobo opened this issue Jul 3, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
blocked Progress cannot be made currently enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@bonsairobo
Copy link

I'm just curious if there is interest in implementing a WebTransport (QUIC) "backend" for the peer-to-peer connections.

There is a relatively new crate for using the WebTransport protocol: https://github.com/BiagioFesta/wtransport

I can see that Matchbox is specifically designed for peer-to-peer networking, relying on a relay server to set up the mesh. I'm not sure if setting up a P2P WebTransport connection is possible or easy at the moment, but I know there are efforts to do so.

Anyway, I need to read more of the code to see what's possible, but I figured I'd start this conversation early.

@garryod
Copy link
Collaborator

garryod commented Jul 3, 2023

Thanks for bringing the p2p-webtransport report to my/our attention - I debated at length the benefits of WebRTC and QUIC before getting involved in this project thus I am rather excited by the prospect of eating my cake and having it too.

If this were to develop to the point of a standard - and be available through wasm-bindgen and webrtc - then I see no reason why we wouldn't want to transition the underlying data channels to QUIC.

In the interest of tempering expectations, is not nearly at that stage yet and it's possible possible @johanhelsing and @simbleau will have other thoughts

@bonsairobo
Copy link
Author

In the interest of tempering expectations, is not nearly at that stage yet and it's possible possible @johanhelsing and @simbleau will have other thoughts

Yea no worries, I understand QUIC is still in early adoption phase, and it might not end up fitting into Matchbox. But thank you for considering it!

Either way, I still plan on using Matchbox for my game, and I just figured I'd raise the issue to learn what (if any) long term plans there were.

@simbleau
Copy link
Collaborator

simbleau commented Jul 4, 2023

I haven't looked into QUIC yet much at all, so I googled compatibility with WASM.

At the moment, not a shot.

Solely because Safari doesn't support this
https://caniuse.com/webtransport

In the future when it has full adoption, it sounds good on paper. I haven't looked into specifics.

@simbleau simbleau added wontfix This will not be worked on blocked Progress cannot be made currently and removed wontfix This will not be worked on labels Jul 4, 2023
@johanhelsing johanhelsing added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 1, 2023
@simbleau
Copy link
Collaborator

@johanhelsing Imo any experimental backends like webtransport or QUIC would warrant a new crate. I think this crate is focused on webRtc and will remain that way, since it's embedded too deep to change at this point.

Thoughts? I think we should close as "won't do."

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
blocked Progress cannot be made currently enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants