I like this change

@enygren - Could you rebase this on the latest main ?

Not sure I agree with including VOD - my opinion is thus far we've largely focused on live/interactive use cases, and whilst including support for "semi-live" and "DVR" is desirable, it doesn't line up with anything else in this charter.

@fiestajetsam is absolutely right that the (individual version of the) requirements draft doesn't even try to justify including these use cases now, and that's based on our understanding of what has been in scope for MOQ since the first side meeting (18 months ago? @afrind would remember), and what the proposed charter has said for a while.

This may be a very reasonable addition to the charter, but we shouldn't slide it in as an aside about caching. If we add it, we should treat it just as we are treating interactive and live media use cases, and we should discuss that on-list.

The relevant text in the requirements draft, for ease of reference, is

The third group, Section 4.4, covering On-Demand Media Ingest (Section 4.4.1) and On-Demand Media streaming (Section 4.4.2) is unlikely to benefit from work in this space. Without the same "Live Media" latency requirements that would motivate deployment of new protocols, existing protocols such as HLS and DASH are probably "good enough" to meet the needs of these use cases.

This does not mean that existing protocols in this space are perfect. Segmented protocols such as HLS and DASH were developed to overcome the deficiencies of TCP, as used in HTTP/1.1 [RFC7230] and HTTP/2 [RFC7540], and do not make full use of the possible congestion window along the path from sender to receiver. Other protocols in this space have their own deficiencies. For example, RTSP [RFC7826] does not have easy ways to add support for new media codecs.

Our expectation is that these use cases will not drive work in the "Media Over QUIC" space, but as new protocols come into being, they may very well be taken up for these use cases as well.

Since the charter is currently under discussion for public review by the IESG, I'd like to hold the PR and ask folks to bring it to the list based on the version the IESG sends out. Discussion can thus be part of the public discussion of that version. So this is also a request for a rebase, but to hold to see if we have a new baseline after IESG ballots on public discussion.

Hi, @enygren, are you still thinking this matters for the approved charter? @fiestajetsam and I had been expecting MOQ to be focused on live media, but the version of the charter that the IESG sent out for comments is broader than that- the text is

This solution may address use cases including live streaming, gaming, and media conferencing

Version -04 of the charter is on the IESG agenda for approval on Thursday (two days from now).

@hardie suggested rebasing the PR on the version(s) the IESG has been working with, and bringing it to the list.