%% You should probably cite rfc6974 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection-06,
    number =    {draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ring-protection-06},
    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/06/},
    author =    {Yaacov Weingarten and Stewart Bryant and Daniele Ceccarelli and Diego Caviglia and Francesco Fondelli and Marco Corsi and Bo Wu and Xuehui Dai},
    title =     {{Applicability of MPLS Transport Profile for Ring Topologies}},
    pagetotal = 30,
    year =      2013,
    month =     apr,
    day =       30,
    abstract =  {This document presents an applicability of existing MPLS protection mechanisms, both local and end-to-end, to the MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) in ring topologies. This document does not propose any new mechanisms or protocols. Requirements for MPLS-TP protection especially for protection in ring topologies are discussed in "Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile" (RFC 5654) and "MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Survivability Framework" (RFC 6372). This document discusses how most of the requirements are met by applying linear protection as defined in RFC 6378 in a ring topology.},
}