2.8.21 Speech Services Control (speechsc)

NOTE: This charter is a snapshot of the 56th IETF Meeting in San Francisco, California USA. It may now be out-of-date.

Last Modified: 2003-01-27

David Oran <oran@cisco.com>
Eric Burger <eburger@snowshore.com>
Transport Area Director(s):
Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
Allison Mankin <mankin@psg.com>
Transport Area Advisor:
Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu>
Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: speechsc@ietf.org
To Subscribe: speechsc-request@ietf.org
In Body: subscribe
Archive: www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/speechsc/current/maillist.html
Description of Working Group:
Many multimedia applications can benefit from having Automated Speech Recognition (ASR), Text to Speech (TTS), and Speaker Verification (SV) processing available as a distributed, network resource. To date, there are a number of proprietary ASR, TTS, and SV API's, as well as two IETF drafts, that address this problem. However, there are serious deficiencies to the existing drafts relating to this problem. In particular, they mix the semantics of existing protocols yet are close enough to other protocols as to be confusing to the implementer.

The speechsc Work Group will develop protocols to support distributed media processing of audio streams. The focus of this working group is to develop protocols to support ASR, TTS, and SV. The working group will only focus on the secure distributed control of these servers.

The working group will develop an informational RFC detailing the architecture and requirements for distributed speechsc control. In addition, the requirements document will describe the use cases driving these requirements. The working group will then examine existing media-related protocols, especially RTSP, for suitability as a protocol for carriage of speechsc server control. The working group will then propose extensions to existing protocols or the development of new protocols, as appropriate, to meet the requirements specified in the informational RFC.

The protocol will assume RTP carriage of media. Assuming session-oriented media transport, the protocol will use SDP to describe the session.

The working group will not be investigating distributed speech recognition (DSR), as exemplified by the ETSI Aurora project. The working group will not be recreating functionality available in other protocols, such as SIP or SDP. The working group will offer changes to existing protocols, with the possible exception of RTSP, to the appropriate IETF work group for consideration. This working group will explore modifications to RTSP, if required.

It is expected that we will coordinate our work in the IETF with the W3C Mutlimodal Interaction Work Group; the ITU-T Study Group 16 Working Party 3/16 on SG 16 Question 15/16; the 3GPP TSG SA WG1; and the ETSI Aurora STQ.

Once the current set of milestones is completed, the speechsc charter may be expanded, with IESG approval, to cover additional uses of the technology, such as the orchestration of multiple ASR/TTS/SV servers, the accommodation of additional types of servers such as simultaneous translation servers, etc.

Goals and Milestones:
NOV 02  Requirements ID submitted to IESG for publication (informational)
JAN 03  Submit Internet Draft(s) Analyzing Existing Protocols (informational)
MAR 03  Submit Internet Draft Describing New Protocol (if required) (standards track)
MAY 03  Submit Drafts to IESG for publication
  • - draft-ietf-speechsc-reqts-03.txt
  • - draft-ietf-speechsc-protocol-eval-01.txt
  • No Request For Comments

    Current Meeting Report

    Minutes of Meeting for the SpeechSC WG
    San Francisco, TUESDAY, March 18, 2003, 14.15-15.15
    Minute-taker: Magnus Westerlund 
    The WG Chairs Eric Burger and David Oran opened the WG meeting. The 
    proposed agenda was used. Magnus Westerlund volunteered to take minutes of 
    meeting. Nobody volunteered to do jabber.
    The Agenda was:
    - Agenda Bashing (Chairs)
    - Requirements Status (Chairs)
    - Work Progress and Dates Protocol Analysis Status
    - Wrap-up and next steps
    David Oran made a status presentation of the requirements document, 
    draft-ietf-speechsc-reqts-03.txt. It was submitted to the IESG in 
    November. IESG has since made some comments. Also input from the hearing 
    impaired community has been received. An updated version will be 
    submitted after this IETF meeting and resubmitted to the IESG for 
    The current charter milestones will not be possible to meet. So all 
    remaining milestones will be pushed forward 2-3 months. This means that the 
    new proposed milestones are these:
    - APR 03 Submit Internet Draft(s) Analyzing Existing Protocols   
    - JUN 03 Submit Internet Draft Describing New Protocol (if required) 
    (standards track)
    - OCT 03 Submit Drafts to IESG for publication
    The Protocol Analysis document status was then presented by the chairs.  The 
    work stalled after the last IETF meeting. There has been a problem 
    between the two views "Can do" and "Could do". The work is being 
    restarted and updated input and parts are due this Friday (21 of March).  A 
    second version is planned for one week later. The chairs asked the 
    authors if they would meet this deadline and no one saw it as a 
    problem.  The Web services part needs quite some work but should be ready in 
    Note: After the WG meeting has ended the analysis authors had a 
    discussion with the following conclusion was made: Web services are on a 
    another level then the problem that SpeechSC tries to solve. Therefore Web 
    services will not be considered in the protocol analysis in SpeechSC.
    To continue the work there is need to determine what direction the 
    SpeechSC protocol should take. There is also a need for editors, 
    interested please contact the chairs. The chairs request input on how to get 
    to a finished protocol. The floor was opened for discussion on what 
    possible problems that people might see. The goal of such discussion was to 
    speed up the work. However nobody had any input at this time.
    The chairs closed the meeting after only 13 minutes and hoped that the next 
    meeting would have more content. Otherwise we could just as well close the 


    Agenda - PDF
    Agenda - HTML/PPT