The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 25, 2022 10:31 UTC (Thu) by gspr (subscriber, #91542)
In reply to: The future of NGINX by LtWorf
Parent article: The future of NGINX

Are you implying that Google has the power to make changes to HTTP/2 on a whim?

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 25, 2022 10:54 UTC (Thu) by hummassa (subscriber, #307) [Link]

> Are you implying that Google has the power to make changes to HTTP/2 on a whim?

With the current adoption of chromium-based, that would not be an unreasonable statement.

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 25, 2022 15:25 UTC (Thu) by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958) [Link] (6 responses)

Basically yes. They can just make youtube go on this hypotetical new protocol available in chrome and throttle the old protocol. Other browsers can implement it or stay slow.

It's that easy for them.

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 26, 2022 6:24 UTC (Fri) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link] (5 responses)

Are you specifically complaining specifically about youtube-dl being throttled? That seems more about the arms race between Google trying to ensure only authorised clients access video streams, and youtube-dl developers trying to reverse those protections (which currently involve interpreting some of the JavaScript on the page to determine correct URLs).

It's not an HTTP 1.1 vs HTTP 2 issue.

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 26, 2022 7:31 UTC (Fri) by wtarreau (subscriber, #51152) [Link]

Often it's even easier. Most video sites try to optimize their bandwidth due to clients having massive ones. If your video player downloads the video faster than you can watch, and you stop in the middle, they send too many bytes over the wire, and that bandwidth has a cost, and even causes congestion on certain links at certain hours. So it's more efficient to throttle every stream to roughly the stream's bandwidth, but that implicitly also throttles downloading tools. Now is that really an issue ?

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 26, 2022 14:46 UTC (Fri) by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958) [Link] (3 responses)

No it's not at all what I'm saying.

I'm saying if google wants to push http 4 they are in a position to do it and force everyone else to implement it.

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 26, 2022 18:59 UTC (Fri) by wtarreau (subscriber, #51152) [Link] (2 responses)

They already forced everyone to use SSL even where it makes no sense at all... When you're the entry point of the internet for the masses, you can do whatever you want. If they decide to stop indexing the sites that use a green background, they can do it and these ones will stop doing business pretty quickly.

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 26, 2022 20:51 UTC (Fri) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

> They already forced everyone to use SSL even where it makes no sense at all...

I've seen enough evil from airport and hotel "access points" that I really don't want them to muck with even `ytmnd.com` content. Forcing everything to at least *support* `https://` is a great boon IMO (forcing it via 304 redirects might be a bit much in some situations even if I do so for my own website).

The future of NGINX

Posted Aug 27, 2022 8:38 UTC (Sat) by LtWorf (subscriber, #124958) [Link]

They forced me to get 2FA on pypi! :D They can certainly force things.