%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-17 instead of this revision.
@techreport{ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-00,
    number =    {draft-ietf-opsawg-oam-characterization-00},
    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-opsawg-oam-characterization/00/},
    author =    {Carlos Pignataro and Adrian Farrel},
    title =     {{Guidelines for Charactering "OAM"}},
    pagetotal = 10,
    year =      ,
    month =     ,
    day =       ,
    abstract =  {As the IETF continues to produce and standardize different Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) protocols and technologies, various qualifiers and modifiers are prepended to the OAM acronym. While, at first glance, the most used appear to be well understood, the same qualifier may be interpreted differently in different contexts. A case in point is the qualifiers "in-band" and "out-of-band" which have their origins in the radio lexicon and which have been extrapolated into other communication networks. This document considers some common qualifiers and modifiers that are prepended, within the context of packet networks, to the OAM acronym, and lays out guidelines for their use in future IETF work. This document updates RFC 6291 by adding to the guidelines for the use of the term "OAM".},
}