IETF MOQ WG: Support for Track Filters and Top-N

Message Snapshot

• List: moq@ietf.org
• Thread subject: Support for Track Filters and Top-N
• Message subject: [Moq] Re: Support for Track Filters and Top-N
• Author: Magnus Westerlund
• Published: 2026-06-01T15:07:23.000Z
• Source tag: ietf-mailing-list
• Message URL: Open in IETF Mail Archive

Summary

Magnus Westerlund posted to the MOQ working group mailing list on June 1, 2026. Cullen, I take note of your objection. However, I do think we are in a situation where not moving more advanced functionality with open iss…

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

Cullen, I take note of your objection. However, I do think we are in a situation where not moving more advanced functionality with open issues into independent specifications actually hurts the completion of the chartered goals for the WG. This do apply to any work that can function as an extension. Having drafts do h…

Plain-Text Body

Cullen,

I take note of your objection. However, I do think we are in a situation where not moving more advanced functionality with open issues into independent specifications actually hurts the completion of the chartered goals for the WG. This do apply to any work that can function as an extension.

Having drafts do have advantages. From my perspective having it in its own draft do make it easier to reference and track the changes of it through draft version releases. It is also easier to put security considerations, motivations and other details in a draft around the core specification text for the functionality. That also clarifies the WG process, issue tracking and PR process. It also off-loads the MOQT editors from having to deal with the more editorial aspects and how it fits in distributing the work better.

Working on this as an extension also fulfils the important work to verify that the extension mechanism work hasn’t forgotten anything. Looking at Track filters and Top-N I think this also very well are a functionality that can be put into a procurement request as something required from a relay network provider. An application service needing this functionality will contract relay’s that support it. I do expect you to not be the only one doing an extension to MOQT.

In regards to putting Track filters and Top-N functionality into MoQT, as long as we resolve the issues that WG participants have against it can be MOQT functionality. However, for this to not be an extension you will need to resolve the issues and show corresponding maturity that including it will have minimal impact on MOQT’s core specifications timeline.

Cheers

Magnus

From: Cullen Fluffy Jennings fluffy@iii.ca Date: Wednesday, 27 May 2026 at 21:26 To: Magnus Westerlund magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com Cc: MOQ Mailing List moq@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Moq] Support for Track Filters and Top-N

Magnus, thought I agree with your conclusion there is not consensus to add this draft right now, I disagree it should be done as a separate draft. I think it should be worked as a PR that can be discussed in context. I think the experience with DTS has shown how much more confusing it is to do this in a separate draft.

I would like to keep working on this as a PR. Thoughts ? or are you concluding that it can not move forward as something we put in MoQT ?