IETF MOQ WG: Knowing the start of a Subgroup
Ian Swett posted to the MOQ working group mailing list on April 29, 2026. In Monday's interim, there was strong interest in knowing what the starting Object Id of a Subgroup is, just like we know the end today. My propo…
Message Snapshot
- List:
moq@ietf.org - Thread subject: Knowing the start of a Subgroup
- Message subject: [Moq] Knowing the start of a Subgroup
- Author: Ian Swett
- Published: 2026-04-29T21:10:45.000Z
- Source tag:
ietf-mailing-list - Message URL: Open in IETF Mail Archive
Summary
Ian Swett posted to the MOQ working group mailing list on April 29, 2026. In Monday's interim, there was strong interest in knowing what the starting Object Id of a Subgroup is, just like we know the end today. My propo…
Why It Matters
This message came from the public MOQ working group archive and captures active discussion, meeting coordination, or implementation feedback around Media over QUIC.
Message Excerpt
In Monday's interim, there was strong interest in knowing what the starting Object Id of a Subgroup is, just like we know the end today. My proposal (#1608 https://github.com/moq-wg/moq-transport/pull/1608) was
Plain-Text Body
In Monday's interim, there was strong interest in knowing what the starting Object Id of a Subgroup is, just like we know the end today.
My proposal (#1608 https://github.com/moq-wg/moq-transport/pull/1608) was to require the Subgroup ID equal the Object ID of the first Object of the Subgroup. The original publisher would do this, and it would naturally be preserved downstream, just like Subgroup ID and Object ID are today. Some people had concerns with this, but I don't think I fully understood them? If anyone wants to spell them out in more detail, that would be great.
To clarify, this retains the ability to stitch together a Subgroup that arrived on two separate streams for whatever reason. That is a core requirement for Subgroups.
I'm not set on my particular design, but I reviewed #1618 https://github.com/moq-wg/moq-transport/pull/1618 (which uses a bitflag) and I think #1608 has two important advantages:
- It's required
- If you receive some Objects from a Subgroup, you know if the first one is the first Object in the subgroup.
Thoughts?
Thanks, Ian