]> Cisco Meraki

albisht@cisco.com

Cisco

tievens@cisco.com

Web and Internet Transport moq MOQ Media over QUIC geocode relay GDOR IATA geo-distributed routing This document defines a mechanism for Media over QUIC (MoQ) relays to advertise their geographic location (geocode) and related path metrics. Some clients require their media data to remain locally or geo-fenced within specific jurisdictions for privacy and security compliance (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA, or sector-specific regulations). This mechanism enables service providers to track the geographic path of media packets through the relay mesh and to enforce geo-fencing policies. It supports Geo-Distributed Orchestration and Routing (GDOR), data residency compliance, latency optimization, and relay selection. The specification includes optional IATA airport codes as human-readable geographic identifiers for major relay locations. About This Document The latest revision of this draft can be found at . Status information for this document may be found at . Discussion of this document takes place on the moq Working Group mailing list (), which is archived at . Subscribe at . Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at .

Introduction Media over QUIC Transport (MOQT) uses a relay-based architecture where publishers push media to relays and subscribers pull from relays. Relays can be chained for CDN-like distribution, forming a mesh of interconnected nodes. In such topologies—as illustrated by deployments with multiple relays (e.g., relays A, B, C, D) connecting Home/Enterprise clients to a Service Media backend—the following questions arise:

• Where is each relay located geographically?
• How close are relays to each other and to clients?
• Which path through the relay mesh minimizes latency or satisfies policy?

Today, MoQ provides no standard way for relays to advertise geographic position. Clients and orchestration systems rely on external mechanisms (e.g., IP geolocation, manual configuration) that are often imprecise, inconsistent, or unavailable. This document specifies a lightweight, protocol-aligned mechanism for relays to advertise geocode and related metrics, enabling:

1. Vicinity and path computation: Determining physical proximity and logical paths between relays.
2. GDOR (Geo-Distributed Orchestration/Routing): Making routing and placement decisions based on geography (e.g., route through EU relays for GDPR, avoid certain jurisdictions).
3. Latency optimization: Selecting relays with lower RTT or propagation time (PT) to the client or to upstream relays.
4. Data residency and compliance: Ensuring media flows stay within required geographic boundaries. Clients often require their data to be locally or geo-fenced for privacy and security compliance (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA).
5. Path tracking: Enabling service providers to track the geographic path of media packets through the relay mesh for compliance audits and geo-fencing enforcement.

Design Goals

• Path trace in-band (primary): Use MOQT extension headers on objects for path tracing as the RECOMMENDED integration. Each relay/proxy appends device name and direction; clients can verify the geographic path from received objects.
• Protocol alignment: Use existing MOQT messages (PUBLISH, SUBSCRIBE) and streams for geocode advertisement, avoiding new message formats. Relays do not need to invent proprietary messaging for cross-vendor use cases.
• Minimal protocol impact: Reuse existing MoQ catalog, metrics, or discovery mechanisms where possible.
• Interoperability: Use standard geographic representations (WGS84, GeoJSON) and widely recognized identifiers (IATA codes).
• Extensibility: Allow optional altitude, region codes, and path metrics (RTT, PT) without mandating them.

Conventions and Definitions The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. Geocode: A representation of geographic position, typically latitude and longitude (WGS84), optionally with altitude. Relay Vicinity: The geographic proximity of one relay to another or to a client, expressed as distance or as a qualitative relationship (e.g., same region, same metro). Relay Path: A sequence of relays through which media flows from publisher to subscriber, or the logical/geographic route between relays. GDOR (Geo-Distributed Orchestration/Routing): Routing and orchestration decisions that consider geographic location, including data residency, latency optimization, and jurisdictional compliance. IATA Code: A three-letter code assigned by the International Air Transport Association to identify airports and major metropolitan areas (e.g., JFK, LHR, FRA). Used here as an optional human-readable geographic identifier for relay locations.

Use Cases

Relay Selection by Proximity A subscriber in New York (NY) may have multiple relays available (e.g., A, B, C, D). With geocode and RTT/PT metrics, the client or an orchestration layer can select the relay that minimizes latency or satisfies geographic constraints.

Geo-Distributed Orchestration (GDOR) Some clients require their media data to remain locally or geo-fenced within specific jurisdictions for privacy and security compliance (e.g., GDPR, HIPAA, or sector-specific regulations). An operator may require that:

• EU subscriber traffic flows only through EU relays.
• Media for a given jurisdiction is processed within that jurisdiction.
• Path selection avoids certain regions for policy or cost reasons.

Geocode enables GDOR by allowing relays to advertise their jurisdiction (e.g., via country/region codes) and by allowing path computation to respect geographic boundaries. Service providers can use relay geocode and the advertised neighbor topology to track the geographic path of media packets as they traverse the MoQ relay mesh, supporting compliance audits and geo-fencing enforcement.

Path and Vicinity Awareness In a relay mesh (e.g., A↔B↔C↔D), knowing the geocode of each relay allows:

• Vicinity: Computing great-circle distance or approximate propagation delay between relays.
• Path: Understanding the geographic route (e.g., NY → Relay D → Relay A → SVC) and optimizing it.

Metrics Integration Deployments commonly measure RTT to Relay and PT (Propagation Time) to Relay as key metrics. Geocode complements these by providing a stable, policy-relevant attribute (location) that does not change with network conditions, while RTT/PT provide dynamic performance signals.

Geocode Representation This section is informative. The following formats are suggested for representing relay geocode; implementations may use alternative representations.

Suggested Format: WGS84 Coordinates Relay geocode may be represented as WGS84 coordinates (as used in GeoJSON ):

• latitude: Decimal degrees, -90 to 90.
• longitude: Decimal degrees, -180 to 180.
• altitude (optional): Meters above WGS84 ellipsoid.

Example (JSON): json { "latitude": 40.6413, "longitude": -73.7781, "altitude": 4 }

Suggested: IATA Code An IATA airport code may be included as a human-readable geographic identifier (e.g., JFK for New York, LHR for London). It is advisory only and may correspond to the nearest major airport or metro area where the relay is located; precise routing may use latitude/longitude when geographic accuracy is required.

Integration with MoQ This document proposes several integration options for geocode advertisement and path tracing.

Option 1: Path Trace via MOQT Extension Headers (RECOMMENDED) To enable clients to verify the geographic path of media objects as they traverse relays and proxies, relays and proxies MAY append a path-trace entry to a MOQT object extension header as objects are forwarded. Path tracing uses the extension header mechanism described in (Section 10.2.1.2). Each path-trace entry in the extension header SHOULD include:

• device: Name or identifier of the relay or proxy (e.g., relay_id, hostname, or a compact label such as relay-D).
• direction: The direction of traversal at this device—e.g., ingress (object received from upstream toward publisher) or egress (object sent toward downstream subscriber). Alternative encodings such as upstream/downstream or in/out may be used.

Additional fields such as iata_code, country, or subdivision MAY be included for compliance and geo-fencing verification. Example path-trace entry (informative): json { "device": "relay-D", "direction": "egress", "iata_code": "JFK" } Clients that receive objects can inspect the extension header to reconstruct the relay path (e.g., relay-D (JFK) egress → relay-A (FRA) ingress → relay-A egress) for compliance audits or geo-fencing enforcement. This is the RECOMMENDED for path tracing as it travels in-band with media and enables clients to verify the geographic path directly from received objects.

Option 2: Geocode Advertisement via MOQT Messages and Streams Relays MAY advertise geocode using standard MOQT messages and streams:

• PUBLISH: A relay publishes its geocode advertisement as a track (e.g., under a reserved namespace such as moq://relay-geocode.moq.arpa/v1/<relay_id>).
• SUBSCRIBE: Other relays, clients, or orchestration systems SUBSCRIBE to geocode tracks to discover relay locations and neighbor topology.
• Streams: Geocode data is carried in MOQT objects over QUIC streams, using the JSON schema defined in the related document (Appendix C) as the object payload.

This approach reuses the same protocol that relays already use for media distribution. No new message types or wire formats are required.

Option 3: Catalog Integration A relay MAY include geocode in catalog metadata for namespaces or tracks it serves. Clients that discover tracks via the catalog can use geocode for relay selection or policy checks.

Option 4: Metrics Integration Geocode MAY be part of metrics exposed per for relay selection and monitoring. Resources (e.g., relays) can include geocode as attributes in the metrics data model.

Option 5: Discovery (Well-Known URI or Setup Option) A relay MAY serve geocode at a well-known path (e.g., /.well-known/moq-relay-geocode) or via a Setup Option in SETUP, for deployments that prefer HTTP-based or session-level discovery. The reserved namespace, extension header type, and exact encoding for the path trace are left to a companion specification or a future revision of .

Vicinity and Path Computation

Great-Circle Distance Given two relays with geocode (lat1, lon1) and (lat2, lon2), the approximate great-circle distance in kilometers can be computed using the Haversine formula or an equivalent. This provides a stable measure of physical proximity independent of network topology.

Path Metrics When relays advertise neighbor topology (e.g., neighbors with rtt_ms and pt_ms per the schema in Appendix C), a client or orchestration system can:

1. Build a relay graph: Nodes = relays, edges = neighbor relationships with RTT/PT.
2. Compute paths: Shortest path by RTT, by PT, or by geographic distance.
3. Apply GDOR constraints: Filter paths to those that stay within required jurisdictions (using country, subdivision).

Vicinity Semantics

• Same metro: Relays with the same iata_code or within ~50 km.
• Same region: Relays with the same subdivision or country.
• Cross-border: Path crosses country boundaries; may trigger compliance checks.

Security Considerations

Privacy

• Geocode reveals relay location. Operators who wish to hide exact location MAY advertise only country and subdivision, or a coarse-grained geocode (e.g., rounded to 0.1°).
• IATA codes are less precise than coordinates and may be preferred when exact location must not be disclosed.

Integrity

• Geocode advertisements SHOULD be integrity-protected (e.g., over TLS as with MoQ) and, when used for compliance, SHOULD be verifiable (e.g., signed by a trusted authority).

Misuse

• Adversaries could advertise false geocode to attract traffic or evade geographic restrictions. Relays SHOULD be authenticated; geocode from untrusted sources SHOULD be validated or ignored.

IANA Considerations This document does not require IANA actions. If a well-known URI or a MoQ parameter type is registered in the future, the appropriate IANA registry would be updated.

References Normative References In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings. Informative References IETF MOQ WG

Appendix A. Example Topology (Informative) The following example illustrates a typical relay mesh topology: Home/Ent (NY) Relay Mesh SVC Media MS | A --- B | \ / +----(16ms RTT)-------------> D | / \ | C --- (to SVC)

• Relay D: JFK (NY), serves Home/Ent with 16ms RTT.
• Relay A, B, C: Interconnected; A connects to SVC.
• Geocode for each enables path selection (e.g., NY client → D → A → SVC) and GDOR (e.g., ensure D and A are in permitted jurisdictions).

Appendix B. IATA Code Reference (Informative) IATA codes are maintained by the International Air Transport Association. A subset useful for MoQ relay identification:

Code	City/Region
JFK	New York (John F. Kennedy)
LGA	New York (LaGuardia)
EWR	Newark (NYC metro)
IAD	Washington Dulles (Virginia)
DCA	Washington Reagan
LHR	London Heathrow
FRA	Frankfurt
CDG	Paris Charles de Gaulle
AMS	Amsterdam
NRT	Tokyo Narita
SIN	Singapore
SYD	Sydney
GRU	São Paulo

Operators SHOULD use the official IATA code list for authoritative mappings.

Appendix C. Relay Advertisement Format (Informative) The JSON schema and example for relay geocode advertisement are defined in the related document moq-relay-geocode-advertisement-format.md, which accompanies this draft. Implementations may use that schema when advertising geocode via Option 2 (PUBLISH/SUBSCRIBE), Option 3 (Catalog), Option 4 (Metrics), or Option 5 (Discovery).

Acknowledgments The authors thank the participants of the Media over QUIC Working Group for discussion and review feedback that helped shape this document.