Performance Evaluation of HTTP/2 over TLS+TCP and HTTP/2 over QUIC in a Mobile Network
Abstract
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
G. Carlucci, L. De Cicco, and S. Mascolo. Http over udp: an experimental investigation of quic. pages 609–614, 2015.
H. De Saxce, I. Oprescu, and Y. Chen. Is http/2 really faster than http/1.1? In Computer Communications Workshops, pages 293–299, 2015.
M. Fischlin and F. Nther. Multi-stage key exchange and the case of
google’s quic protocol. In ACM Sigsac Conference on Computer and
Communications Security, pages 1193–1204, 2014.
F. Gratzer. Quic-quick udp internet connections. Future In- ternet (FI) and Innovative Internet Technologies and Mobile Communications (IITM),
, 2016.
R. Lychev, S. Jero, A. Boldyreva, and C. Nita-Rotaru. How secure and
quick is quic? provable security and performance analyses. pages 214–
, 2015.
H. F. Nielsen, J. Gettys, A. Bairdsmith, E. Prud’Hommeaux, H. W. Lie,
and C. Lilley. Network performance effects of http/1.1, css1, and png.
Acm Sigcomm Computer Communi- cation Review, 27(4):155–166, 1997.
R. Peon and H. Ruellan. Hpack: Header compression for http/2. 2013.
G. Szabo ́, S. Ra ́cz, D. Bezzera, I. Nogueira, and D. Sadok. Media qoe
enhancement with quic. In Computer Communi- cations Workshops
(INFOCOM WKSHPS), 2016 IEEE Con- ference on, pages 219–220.
IEEE, 2016.
B. Thomas, R. Jurdak, and I. Atkinson. Spdying up the web.
Communications of the Acm, 55(12):64–73, 2012.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2018 Journal of Information Sciences and Computing Technologies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2014 Journal of Information Sciences and Computing Technologies. All rights reserved.
ISSN: 2394-9066
For any help/support contact us at jiscteditor@scitecresearch.com.