From 584a9bd7353639a63dce8f0b53690b0ca6f83ad2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Transaction Science Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2026 03:57:55 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?wai/research:=20add=20=C2=A74.4=20=E2=80=94=20t?= =?UTF-8?q?he=20MoQ=20streaming-format=20slot=20the=20sweep=20missed?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit The automated survey found MoQ only through the confidentiality binding WAI already has, and never reached the streaming-format layer. That layer is where WAI actually belongs, and the slot is open. MoQ separates transport (MOQT) from streaming format (MSF). The catalog's `packaging` field names the format, and MSF fixes its value set — loc, mediatimeline, eventtimeline, moqlog, moqmetrics, catalog — with no central registry. That reads closed. CMSF proves it is not. `draft-ietf-moq-cmsf` is a sibling I-D that declares packaging value `cmaf`, states in §3.5.1 that it "extends the allowed packaging values defined in [MSF]", inherits MSF wholesale, adds two track-level catalog fields, and registers nothing: "This document has no IANA actions." A sibling draft, no registry action, no permission sought — the cheapest standards path in the survey, and already walked twice counting LOCMAF. What CMSF did NOT take is the per-object slot. MSF §12 defines MSF Properties at Track AND Object scope with an IANA property-type registry holding essentially one entry (MSF_COMPRESSION); CMSF adds track-level fields only. A per-object property carrying a content commitment and a measured-energy figure is the shape jwp-receipts already has — the one place in this survey where WAI's existing artifact fits an existing extension point without redesign. Bounded by §4.5: what would be bound is field semantics and the rule over them, never MOQT's extension-header byte encoding. And MOQT is pre-Last-Call, so the honest form is a draft that tracks the transport, not a normative extension that pins it. Sourced from direct reads of draft-ietf-moq-msf and draft-ietf-moq-cmsf-00, not from the sweep. The subsection says so, because the miss is itself informative: a survey keyed to what is NEW can walk past a slot that is old, open and unclaimed. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 --- wai/research/2030-transport-landscape.md | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/wai/research/2030-transport-landscape.md b/wai/research/2030-transport-landscape.md index 0f9308d14..47ddd78a9 100644 --- a/wai/research/2030-transport-landscape.md +++ b/wai/research/2030-transport-landscape.md @@ -534,7 +534,57 @@ quantum, world or haptic families, whose register entries WAI must author itself And the grammar is thin, close to a JSON-Schema subset; the value is the ratified precedent and the register discipline, not novel machinery. -### 4.4 What must NOT be bound +### 4.4 The streaming-format slot, and how CMSF proves it is open + +MoQ separates **transport** (`draft-ietf-moq-transport`, rev 18, approaching WG +Last Call) from **streaming format** (`draft-ietf-moq-msf`). MOQT moves objects; +MSF says what the objects *mean* — it fragments a bitstream into objects, uses a +**catalog** to declare what a publisher emits, and sets prioritisation. + +The catalog's `packaging` field names the format, and MSF's own text fixes its +value set: `loc`, `mediatimeline`, `eventtimeline`, `moqlog`, `moqmetrics`, +`catalog`. There is no central streaming-format registry. + +**CMSF shows the set is not closed in practice.** `draft-ietf-moq-cmsf` is a +sibling Internet-Draft that: + +- declares `packaging` value **`cmaf`**, stating in §3.5.1 that it *"extends the + allowed packaging values defined in [MSF]"*; +- inherits MSF wholesale — *"All of the specifications, requirements, and + terminology defined in [MSF] apply to implementations of this extension"*; +- adds two **track-level** catalog fields (`maxGrpSapStartingType`, + `maxObjSapStartingType`); +- and registers nothing: **"This document has no IANA actions."** + +A sibling draft, no registry action, no permission sought. That is the cheapest +standards path anywhere in this survey, and it is already walked — LOCMAF is a +second instance of the same move. + +**What CMSF did not take is the per-object slot.** MSF §12 defines MSF Properties +at **Track** *and* **Object** scope, with an IANA *MSF Property Type values* +registry that today holds essentially one entry (`MSF_COMPRESSION`). CMSF adds +track-level fields only and defines no per-object property. + +A per-object property carrying a content commitment and a measured-energy figure +is the shape `jwp-receipts.md` already has. This is the one place in this survey +where WAI's existing artifact fits an existing extension point **without +redesign** — the receipt is already per-object, and the slot is already per-object +and empty. + +Two constraints, both per §4.4. First, what would be bound is the **field +semantics and the rule over them**, never MOQT's extension-header byte encoding — +that stays MOQT's. Second, MOQT is pre-Last-Call: a binding written now is +written against a moving target, so the honest form is a draft that tracks the +transport rather than a normative extension that pins it. + +*Provenance of this subsection:* added after the sweep, from direct reads of +`draft-ietf-moq-msf` and `draft-ietf-moq-cmsf-00`. The automated survey did not +surface the streaming-format layer at all — it found MoQ only through the +confidentiality binding WAI already has — which is itself worth noting about the +method: a sweep keyed to *what is new* can miss a slot that is old, open, and +unclaimed. + +### 4.5 What must NOT be bound Stated explicitly so it is not re-argued: ISOBMFF/DASH carriage of green metadata; the RTCP feedback messages themselves; the C2PA Decoupled HTTP @@ -920,6 +970,7 @@ Items 1–2 are internal defects that need no external dependency at all. | 11 | **NMOS constraint-set grammar over the capability registry** (§4.3) | a sink-side precondition on §4 dispatch; author register entries for the non-broadcast families | BCP-004-01/-02 v1.0.0 (ratified) | makes §7.1 rendition selection evaluable rather than policy-deferred | | 12 | **Register the Part 16 derivation operations with a per-operation determinism tier** (§3.1) | capability strings + tiers; do not adopt compositing | ISO/IEC 23001-16:2021 (published) | prevents restating a 2021 ratification as a WAI invention | | 13 | **MPEG-AI Part 6 requirement mapping + SC 29 membership path** (§6.5) | map WAI's measured-energy binding and determinism tiers onto the CfP requirements | CfP responses due **13 January 2027** | the only square in this survey with a deadline | +| 13b | **MoQ streaming-format binding** — a sibling I-D declaring `packaging: "wai"`, plus a per-object MSF Property carrying the JWP content commitment and measured joules (§4.4) | one draft; inherit MSF; **no IANA action** (CMSF precedent) | `draft-ietf-moq-msf` / `-cmsf`; MOQT pre-Last-Call, so track rather than pin | the per-object property slot is empty, the receipt is already per-object, and the transport is the one Akamai-class delivery is converging on | | 14 | **Watch list** | relay geocode (unadopted I-D, data model only); FCM cut-point receipt; the VCM conformance suite when it issues; ISO/IEC 23001-11 4th ed. and 23001-19 catalogue confirmation | — | none is a stable surface yet | --- -- 2.54.0 (Apple Git-157)