s2n VS neqo

It seems to support multiple options but requires you pick at least one of them. https://github.com/aws/s2n-tls/blob/main/docs/BUILD.md#build...

I think GnuTLS is probably the second most popular TLS library, after openssl.

I'll also mentions s2n and rustls-ffi for completeness as C libraries, though the former isn't widely used, and the latter is very experimental still. https://github.com/aws/s2n-tls and https://github.com/rustls/rustls-ffi respectively.

I've seen operating on unauthenticated plaintext enough times to list it as my own pet peeve with AES-GCM. But it's a problem for chunked messages too. A few years ago we released a SCRAM mode that makes very minimal changes to AES-GCM so that it mathematically can't operate on unauthenticated plaintext. https://github.com/aws/s2n-tls/tree/main/scram

> The documentation is kind of vague, but apparently you have to re-enable it regularly.[3]

This is correct. And in the end it means more or less that setting the socket option is more of a way of sending an explicit ACK from userspace than a real setting.

It's not great for common use-cases, because making userspace care about ACKs will obviously degrade efficiency (more syscalls).

However it can make sense for some use-cases. E.g. I saw the s2n TLS library using QUICKACK to avoid the TLS handshake being stuck [1]. Maybe also worthwhile to be set in some specific RPC scenarios where the server might not immediately send a response on receiving the request, and where the client could send additional frames (e.g. gRPC client side streaming, or in pipelined HTTP requests if the server would really process those in parallel and not just let them sit in socket buffers).

[1] https://github.com/aws/s2n-tls/blob/46c47a71e637cabc312ce843...

It looks like by default s2n-quic uses this TLS implementation, which is not based on the ring crate (though it is written in C)

https://github.com/aws/s2n-tls

I would be interested in the other SSL implementations:

- https://github.com/awslabs/s2n

- https://boringssl.googlesource.com/boringssl

- https://bearssl.org/

Are these subpar implementations or there are other reasons not to use these?

Neqo (Mozilla) and Quiche (Cloudflare) both implement QUIC and HTTP/3. I believe they are both developing an implementation of WebTransport.

neqo

Mozilla has a Rust QUIC implementation (one of three good ones in Rust) https://github.com/mozilla/neqo

I'm not sure why it's not used here.

As an code hobbyist I'm working on an opensource project where I would be happy to use QUIC. I did a little research and found Quinn and Quiche but also the Mozilla's implementation for which I couldn't find crate Neqo.

Is it possible to compile quicly cli (referenced in the blog post) with musl instead of glibc. I had to add signal.h and it then compiled successfully but I got illegal instruction segfault when executing cli.

https://github.com/h2o/quicly

There are a few Rust alternatives for QUIC. Anyone tried them and have comments.

https://github.com/cloudflare/quiche

https://github.com/quinn-rs/quinn

https://github.com/mozilla/neqo

The reason is the need to have total flexibility (control). [0]

I reckon to make it as painless as possible to integrate it into Firefox. Also probably a tiny bit of not-invented-here syndrome too :)

[0] https://github.com/mozilla/neqo/issues/81

mozilla/neqo