TCP and QUIC can both leverage ECN to avoid congestion loss and its retransmission overhead. However, both protocols require support of their remote endpoints and it took two decades since the initial standardization of ECN for TCP to reach 80% ECN support and more in the wild. In contrast, the QUIC standard mandates ECN support, but there are notable ambiguities that make it unclear if and how ECN can actually be used with QUIC on the Internet. Hence, in this paper, we analyze ECN support with QUIC in the wild: We conduct repeated measurements on more than 180 M domains to identify HTTP/3 websites and analyze the underlying QUIC connections w.r.t. ECN support. We only find 20% of QUIC hosts, providing 6% of HTTP/3 websites, to mirror client ECN codepoints. Yet, mirroring ECN is only half of what is required for ECN with QUIC, as QUIC validates mirrored ECN codepoints to detect network impairments: We observe that less than 2% of QUIC hosts, providing less than 0.3% of HTTP/3 websites, pass this validation. We identify possible root causes in content providers not supporting ECN via QUIC and network impairments hindering ECN. We thus also characterize ECN with QUIC distributedly to traverse other paths and discuss our results w.r.t. QUIC and ECN innovations beyond QUIC.

HTTP/2 and HTTP/3 avoid concurrent connections but instead multiplex requests over a single connection. Besides enabling new features, this reduces overhead and enables fair bandwidth sharing. Redundant connections should hence be a story of the past with HTTP/2. However, they still exist, potentially hindering innovation and performance. Thus, we measure their spread and analyze their causes in this paper. We find that 36% - 72% of the 6.24 M HTTP Archive and 78% of the Alexa Top 100k websites cause Chromium-based webbrowsers to open superfluous connections. We mainly attribute these to domain sharding, despite HTTP/2 efforts to revert it, and DNS load balancing, but also the Fetch Standard.