It's not one standard. It's about having a huge head on the on all the important internet standards and pushing their cloud interests. It designed to work well at their scale on their network you connect to directly. The standard group should taking into small and medium provider but there not really.
Who has the resources to follow Google's multi-azimuth "standardisation" pace ?
> It's about having a huge head on the on all the important internet standards and pushing their cloud interests
Is Google not supposed to be trying to improve the services they offer?
> It designed to work well at their scale on their network you connect to directly.
I don't see any reason why QUIC won't be perfectly usable on most networks and that is what the article was about. I'm not sure what standard Google is spearheading which is only going to be useful on networks their size and will someone harm other networks.
> The standard group should taking into small and medium provider but there not really.
Again, what is an example of this?
> Who has the resources to follow Google's multi-azimuth "standardisation" pace ?
I really don't see what the issue here is - Google is spearheading new standards. In doing so, it's working with the IETF to develop those standards. I'm not aware of any indication that its working in bad faith or subverting IETF processes. The IETF process is fairly open. No one can follow everything happening in technology all the time - too much is going on. It seems like you are saying that Google should stop or artificially slow its work with standards bodies so that outside observers unaffiliated with those bodies can follow more closely?
