Then some sessions get a shitty link and others get a better link. Your bandwidth may go up for a benchmark of a lot of concurrent sessions but your latency will be random and all over the place.
Doing it at the packet level in theory gives you the ability to exploit the aggregate bandwidth for any session but as OP noted you still have all the latency problems and middleboxes getting in the way.
QUIC by the way solves the middlebox problem and you could put individual QUIC streams on separate connections to solve the head of line blocking that can appear but I feel like that’s closer to the TCP session thing where you only benefit the use cases that set up multiple streams. HTTP3 where this does happen may not benefit though because bandwidth tends to not be a problem if your rich enough to afford multiple links in the first place (ie more latency sensitive). This could be useful in places if you build a custom end to end solution for video streaming where you put the time-sensitive parts of the video on the lowest latency link and let the rest of the video buffer across all links. It’s a very niche use case though and not worth the effort I think.
I never understood why companies didn't simply leverage 24x7 internet MSPs.
They are able to staff 24x7 by spreading the cost over multiple customers and working through the process of making your application manageable by a 3rd party is super beneficial.
Most of these companies will also do performance monitoring and analysis as well.
They see issues and optimization opportunities across multiple applications and know more than a single team who's only built one.
That works well for generic IT systems and running the desktop/laptop fleets, but doesn’t work at all for running the software a company builds.
We typically split our teams, so we have ~16 split across two time zones so that our shifts are just 12 hours during the day. It works well, but it is expensive, so we support a lot of services (or a small number of very high priority services) as a result.
I hadn't heard of Managed Service Providers before, but you make a good case for them.
I'm finding surprisingly little discussion on HN regarding the costs/benefits of MSPs. Or rather, under which conditions (such as company size) they make sense.
However, recently, I've come to understand that is AI is about the inherently unreal and that authentic human connection is really going to be where it's at.
I think KaiserPro is saying authentic human connection doesn't "pay the bills", so to speak. If AI is "about the unreal" as you say, what if it makes everything you care about unreal?
