1.1. The development of MOQT is driven by goals in a number of areas - <del> specifically latency, the robustness of QUIC, workflow efficiency and relay support. </del> <ins> specifically latency, the robust feature set of QUIC and relay support. </ins> 1.1.1. <del> HTTP Adaptive Streaming (HAS) has been successful at achieving scale although often at the cost of latency.  Latency is necessary to correct for variable network throughput.  Ideally live content is consumed at the same bitrate it is produced.  End-to-end latency would be fixed and only subject to encoding and transmission delays. Unfortunately, networks have variable throughput, primarily due to congestion.  Attempting to deliver content encoded at a higher bitrate than the network can support causes queuing along the path from producer to consumer.  The speed at which a protocol can detect and respond to queuing determines the overall latency.  TCP-based protocols are simple but are slow to detect congestion and suffer from head-of-line blocking.  Protocols utilizing UDP directly can avoid queuing, but the application is then responsible for the complexity of fragmentation, congestion control, retransmissions, receiver feedback, reassembly, and more.  One goal of MOQT is to achieve the best of both these worlds: leverage the features of QUIC to create a simple yet flexible low latency protocol that can rapidly detect and respond to congestion. </del> <ins> Latency is necessary to correct for variable network throughput. Ideally live content is consumed at the same bitrate it is produced. End-to-end latency would be fixed and only subject to encoding and transmission delays.  Unfortunately, networks have variable throughput, primarily due to congestion.  Attempting to deliver content encoded at a higher bitrate than the network can support causes queuing along the path from producer to consumer.  The speed at which a protocol can detect and respond to congestion determines the overall latency.  TCP-based protocols are simple but are slow to detect congestion and suffer from head-of-line blocking.  Protocols utilizing UDP directly can avoid queuing, but the application is then responsible for the complexity of fragmentation, congestion control, retransmissions, receiver feedback, reassembly, and more.  One goal of MOQT is to achieve the best of both these worlds: leverage the features of QUIC to create a simple yet flexible low latency protocol that can rapidly detect and respond to congestion. </ins> 1.1.2. The parallel nature of QUIC streams can provide improvements in the face of loss.  A goal of MOQT is to design a streaming protocol to leverage the transmission benefits afforded by parallel QUIC streams <del> as well exercising options for flexible loss recovery.  Applying QUIC to HAS via HTTP/3 has not yet yielded generalized improvements in throughput.  One reason for this is that sending segments down a single QUIC stream still allows head-of-line blocking to occur. </del> <ins> as well exercising options for flexible loss recovery. </ins> 1.1.3. <del> Internet delivered media today has protocols optimized for ingest and separate protocols optimized for distribution.  This protocol switch in the distribution chain necessitates intermediary origins which re- </del> <ins> Some live media architectures today have separate protocols for ingest and distribution, for example RTMP and HTTP based HLS or DASH. Switching protocols necessitates intermediary origins which re- </ins> package the media content.  While specialization can have its <del> benefits, there are gains in efficiency to be had in not having to re-package content.  A goal of MOQT is to develop a single protocol </del> <ins> benefits, there are efficiency gains to be had in not having to re- package content.  A goal of MOQT is to develop a single protocol </ins> which can be used for transmission from contribution to distribution. A related goal is the ability to support existing encoding and packaging schemas, both for backwards compatibility and for