[Moq] Re: Simplifying the Object ID Model and caching

[Aman Sharma <[e-mail]>]

I agree that this would be a simplification, and would allow us to remove
the Prior Object ID Gap property. Any implementation relying on
non-contiguous object IDs could trivially define its own parameter to
convey the information previously conveyed through object IDs.


On Wed, Oct 21, 2026 at 7:00 PM Ian Swett <ianswett=
[e-mail]> wrote:

> I believe all members of this WG can agree that the MoQ Object Model is
> too complex. In the past, we've been unable to simplify it, but I believe
> there is a simplification that improves caching and is acceptable. That's
> sequentially
> 
> I believe all members of this WG can agree that the MoQ Object Model is
> too complex. In the past, we've been unable to simplify it, but I believe
> there is a simplification that improves caching and is acceptable.
>
> That's sequentially increasing Object IDs beginning at 0 (ie: 0, 1, 2, 3,
> etc).  This makes it trivial to know when all the Objects in a Group have
> been received once the End of Group is received, and it avoids unnecessary
> Fetches upstream when a Track is initially Subscribe-delivered and then
> cached.
>
> I realize there is an attraction to ascribing a meaning to the Object ID
> (e.g., using it for the timestamp), but the byte savings are minimal at
> best and this makes MoQ much more brittle. Don't think I haven't tried.
>
> Are there people for whom this would break their usecase and can
> they explain why?
>
> Ian
> _______________________________________________
> Moq mailing list -- [e-mail]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [e-mail]
>