IETF MOQ WG: Consensus call on Object filters

Message Snapshot

• List: moq@ietf.org
• Thread subject: Consensus call on Object filters
• Message subject: [Moq] Re: Consensus call on Object filters
• Author: Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)
• Published: 2026-05-24T00:49:03.000Z
• Source tag: ietf-mailing-list
• Message URL: Open in IETF Mail Archive

Summary

Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) posted to the MOQ working group mailing list on May 24, 2026. Hi Victor, I agree the Object ID filter seems like the least useful, except for the important case of keyframe scrubbing (ID=0). It made…

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

Hi Victor, I agree the Object ID filter seems like the least useful, except for the important case of keyframe scrubbing (ID=0). It made more sense for completeness when we also had the Group ID filter to cover almost all object header fields. But we decided to remove the Group ID filter due to overlap with subscripti…

Plain-Text Body

Hi Victor,

I agree the Object ID filter seems like the least useful, except for the important case of keyframe scrubbing (ID=0). It made more sense for completeness when we also had the Group ID filter to cover almost all object header fields. But we decided to remove the Group ID filter due to overlap with subscription location filters. We didn't remove the Object ID filter, despite the same overlap, due to keyframe scrubbing.

Maybe we should consider a recommendation in LOC/MSF to put keyframes in their own Subgroup ID=0 for keyframe scrubbing using the Subgroup filter, and remove the Object ID filter. Some SVC structures put keyframes in their own temporal layer (0) for various reasons. So there is already some precedent for this, although it is rare not the norm. It would also allow different priorities for keyframes which seems useful. How do people feel about this?

Thanks, Mo

---

From: Victor Vasiliev vasilvv=40google.com@dmarc.ietf.org Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2026 10:32 AM To: Magnus Westerlund magnus.westerlund=40ericsson.com@dmarc.ietf.org Cc: MOQ Mailing List moq@ietf.org Subject: [Moq] Re: Consensus call on Object filters

Hi,

I think that filtering by subgroup is really important for SVC support.

Of the filters in the current PR, I also think that filtering by priority and extension field could be useful. I'm skeptical about the object ID filter, but that should be relatively trivial too.

Cheers, Victor.