%% You should probably cite rfc6974 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection-02,
    number =    {draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection-02},
    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-ring-protection/02/},
    author =    {Yaacov Weingarten and Stewart Bryant and Nurit Sprecher and Daniele Ceccarelli and Diego Caviglia and Francesco Fondelli and Marco Corsi and Bo Wu and Xuehui Dai},
    title =     {{Applicability of MPLS-TP Linear Protection for Ring Topologies}},
    pagetotal = 28,
    year =      2012,
    month =     apr,
    day =       29,
    abstract =  {This document presents an applicability statement to address the requirements for protection of ring topologies for Multi-Protocol Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Label Switched Paths (LSP) on multiple layers. The MPLS-TP Requirements document specifies specific criteria for justification of dedicated protection mechanism for particular topologies, including optimizing the number of OAM entities needed, minimizing the number of labels for protection paths, minimizing the number of recovery elements in the network, and minimizing the number of control and management transactions necessary. The document proposes a methodology for ring protection based on existing MPLS-TP survivability mechanisms, specifically those defined in MPLS-TP Linear Protection, without the need for specification of new constructs or protocols. This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) / International Telecommunications Union Telecommunications Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile within the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures to support the capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network as defined by the ITU-T.},
}