%% You should probably cite rfc6669 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-09, number = {draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-09}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-analysis/09/}, author = {Nurit Sprecher and Luyuan Fang}, title = {{An Overview of the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Toolset for MPLS-Based Transport Networks}}, pagetotal = 21, year = 2012, month = apr, day = 17, abstract = {This document provides an overview of the Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) toolset for MPLS-based transport networks. The toolset consists of a comprehensive set of fault management and performance monitoring capabilities (operating in the data plane) that are appropriate for transport networks as required in RFC 5860 and support the network and services at different nested levels. This overview includes a brief recap of the MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) OAM requirements and functions and the generic mechanisms created in the MPLS data plane that allow the OAM packets to run in-band and share their fate with data packets. The protocol definitions for each of the MPLS-TP OAM tools are defined in separate documents (RFCs or Working Group documents), which are referenced by this document. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.}, }