The current library uses a bespoke JSON API. MoQ Transport is finally getting adopted and we should switch to it.
It doesn't support all of the needed features so we can make extensions, but I would like to be backwards compatible. If that's not possible then we should bring it up with the working group.
The draft is quite flexible with how groups/objects can be used. However it makes decoding an absolute pain, so I want to be explicit on how "Warp" runs on top of MoQ Transport. This will be a long running debate within the WG.
Each independent group of pictures is sent over a dedicated QUIC stream. Which means that: CMAF segment == QUIC stream
To map this to MoQ Transport, it means a single object per group with an unspecified size (0). That's how the server works today albeit with a JSON header instead of an object header.
The current library uses a bespoke JSON API. MoQ Transport is finally getting adopted and we should switch to it.
It doesn't support all of the needed features so we can make extensions, but I would like to be backwards compatible. If that's not possible then we should bring it up with the working group.
The draft is quite flexible with how groups/objects can be used. However it makes decoding an absolute pain, so I want to be explicit on how "Warp" runs on top of MoQ Transport. This will be a long running debate within the WG.
Each independent group of pictures is sent over a dedicated QUIC stream. Which means that: CMAF segment == QUIC stream
To map this to MoQ Transport, it means a single object per group with an unspecified size (0). That's how the server works today albeit with a JSON header instead of an object header.