Media Over QUIC
charter-ietf-moq-01

[Ballot comment]
Thanks for the update and addressing my comments.

one more nit - s/Even when
media is content end-to-end encrypted/ Even when media content is end-to-end encrypted

[Ballot block]
Over all the charter looks great and thanks for working on this.

I am putting block just to discuss/clarify two things (should be easy to resolute), not because I am against this charter -

  - during the BoF I got a feel that there are some confusion on what the mandatory to implement media format means, more specifically it is related to media encoding or not. The current charter text has not clarified that. I think simple verbose description of what the media format means could solve that.

  - the charter says - "This working group will not propose changes to the underlying QUIC transport,
but may propose requirements for QUIC extensions to the QUIC WG.". however, in the milestone it says - "WG adoption of Protocol Specification for Datagram Extension to Media
Publication Protocol over QUIC". So I am now confused as I don't know if the intention in the charter matches the milestone or not. Here "datagram extention" is this QUIC datagram extension and where would that extension happen in QUIC or in MoQ.

[Ballot comment]
Some minor comments below,

  - What is "raw QUIC"? is this "unmodified RFC9000"?

  - to me, media means media content/media protocol payload. Certainly in this charter media means media content and metadata and protocol information, it says  - "Media will be encrypted at the
transport layer using the standard QUIC mechanisms. Media content may be
end-to-end encrypted in certain use cases,". It is the case, I think it is better to clarify the distinction here as there might be participants/future participants in the WG to them media means media content/media protocol payload.

[Ballot comment]
Some minor comments (left over from my ballot on 00-03):

- "for ingest and distribution" of what ?

- should "end-to-end" be specified in the charter ? Especially when "ingest and distribution" is mentioned at the top of the charter. I.e., I assume that end-to-end it only for the distribution part and not from the camera to the browser

[Ballot comment]
(1) There seems to be some (inconsistent) duplication in the text.  For example:

(a) "one or more media formats" is called for.  This text shows up a couple of paragraphs later:

  The proposed solution will provide extensibility for supporting
  different media formats and shall specify a mandatory to implement
  media format to ensure interoperability. Support for multiple media
  types and media encodings shall be proposed.

The MTI format is in line with "one or more media formats", but I'm not sure if the proposal in the second sentence results in the support for more than one or just a proposal to select the MTI from.


(b) Requesting "media and encodings", with more or less detail, is mentioned several times.  It would be nice to consolidate the expected characteristics.



(2) Eric asked "for ingest and distribution" of what ?"  The same phrase is used as a transport (?): "protocol for publishing media over ingest and distribution".


(3) s/DASH Industr Forum/DASH Industry Forum

[Ballot comment]
Looking forward to reading the documents out of this future WG.

Some minor comments:

- "for ingest and distribution" of what ?

- "The solution will specify a simple method for clients to authenticate to the relay or server to transmit or receive media" is about relay and server while the list above only mentions "cache"

- should "end-to-end" be specified in the charter ? Especially when "ingest and distribution" is mentioned at the top of the charter. I.e., I assume that end-to-end it only for the distribution part and not from the camera to the browser

- should there be an architecture document ?

Finally, nice to read that coordination will be done with MOPS WG (where there are several media ecosystem proponents).

Regards

-éric