%% You should probably cite rfc6670 instead of this I-D. @techreport{sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-considerations-01, number = {draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-considerations-01}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-considerations/01/}, author = {Nurit Sprecher and Kyung-Yeop Hong}, title = {{The Reasons for Selecting a Single Solution for MPLS-TP OAM}}, pagetotal = 27, year = 2011, month = sep, day = 23, abstract = {The MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) is a profile of MPLS technology for use in transport network deployments. That is, MPLS-TP is a set of functions and features selected from the wider MPLS toolset and applied in a consistent way to meet the needs and requirements of operators of packet transport networks. During the process of development of the profile, additions to the MPLS toolset have been made to ensure that the tools available met the requirements. These additions were motivated by MPLS-TP, but form part of the wider MPLS toolset such that any of them could be used in any MPLS deployment. One major set of additions provides enhanced support for Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM). This enables fault management and performance monitoring to the level needed in a transport network. Many solutions and protocol extensions have been proposed to address these OAM requirements, and this document sets out the reasons for selecting a single, coherent set of solutions for standardization.}, }