%% You should probably cite rfc8256 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-13,
    number =    {draft-ietf-mpls-tp-temporal-hitless-psm-13},
    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-temporal-hitless-psm/13/},
    author =    {Alessandro D'Alessandro and Loa Andersson and Satoshi Ueno and Kaoru Arai and Yoshinori Koike},
    title =     {{Requirements for hitless MPLS path segment monitoring}},
    pagetotal = 16,
    year =      2017,
    month =     mar,
    day =       8,
    abstract =  {One of the most important OAM capabilities for transport network operation is fault localisation. An in-service, on-demand segment monitoring function of a transport path is indispensable, particularly when the service monitoring function is activated only between end points. However, the current segment monitoring approach defined for MPLS (including the transport profile (MPLS-TP)) in RFC 6371 "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance Framework for MPLS- Based Transport Networks" has drawbacks. This document provides an analysis of the existing MPLS-TP OAM mechanisms for the path segment monitoring and provides requirements to guide the development of new OAM tools to support a Hitless Path Segment Monitoring (HPSM).},
}