%% You should probably cite rfc6941 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-mpls-tp-security-framework-07,
    number =    {draft-ietf-mpls-tp-security-framework-07},
    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-security-framework/07/},
    author =    {Luyuan Fang and Ben Niven-Jenkins and Scott Mansfield and Richard F. Graveman},
    title =     {{MPLS-TP Security Framework}},
    pagetotal = 11,
    year =      2013,
    month =     jan,
    day =       20,
    abstract =  {This document provides a security framework for Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport Profile (MPLS-TP). MPLS-TP extends MPLS technologies and introduces new OAM capabilities, a transport- oriented path protection mechanism, and strong emphasis on static provisioning supported by network management systems. This document addresses the security aspects relevant in the context of MPLS-TP specifically. It describes potential security threats, security requirements for MPLS-TP, and mitigation procedures for MPLS-TP networks and MPLS-TP interconnection to other MPLS and GMPLS networks. This document is built on RFC5920 "MPLS and GMPLS MPLS and GMPLS security framework" by providing additional security considerations which are applicable to the MPLS-TP extensions. All the security considerations from RFC5920 are assumed to apply. This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) / International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile within the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures to support the capabilities and functionality of a packet transport network.},
}