-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.6k
SignalR support for webtransport #39583
Copy link
Copy link
Open
Labels
Blazor ♥ SignalRThis issue is related to the experience of Signal R and Blazor working togetherThis issue is related to the experience of Signal R and Blazor working togetherHTTP3area-networkingIncludes servers, yarp, json patch, bedrock, websockets, http client factory, and http abstractionsIncludes servers, yarp, json patch, bedrock, websockets, http client factory, and http abstractionsarea-signalrIncludes: SignalR clients and serversIncludes: SignalR clients and serversinvestigate
Milestone
Description
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Labels
Blazor ♥ SignalRThis issue is related to the experience of Signal R and Blazor working togetherThis issue is related to the experience of Signal R and Blazor working togetherHTTP3area-networkingIncludes servers, yarp, json patch, bedrock, websockets, http client factory, and http abstractionsIncludes servers, yarp, json patch, bedrock, websockets, http client factory, and http abstractionsarea-signalrIncludes: SignalR clients and serversIncludes: SignalR clients and serversinvestigate
Type
Fields
Give feedbackNo fields configured for issues without a type.
Is there an existing issue for this?
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe the problem.
On the server side, do websockets create more mux overhead than UDP? If so, does this make a good argument for having Blazor support Webtransport? It appears Webtransport just went GA in Chrome a couple weeks ago? Does this mean Edge will follow soon?
https://developer.chrome.com/blog/new-in-chrome-97/#webtransport
Describe the solution you'd like
In the same way client side websocket can be used in Blazor, I would also like to use Webtransport client side connections.
Additional context
No response