%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis-03 instead of this revision.
@techreport{ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis-01,
    number =    {draft-ietf-opsawg-rfc5706bis-01},
    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-rfc5706bis/01/},
    author =    {Benoît Claise and Joe Clarke and Adrian Farrel and Samier Barguil and Carlos Pignataro and Ran Chen},
    title =     {{Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management in IETF Specifications}},
    pagetotal = 49,
    year =      2025,
    month =     dec,
    day =       17,
    abstract =  {New Protocols or Protocol Extensions are best designed with due consideration of the functionality needed to operate and manage them. Retrofitting operations and management considerations is suboptimal. The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to authors and reviewers on what operational and management aspects should be addressed when defining New Protocols or Protocol Extensions. This document obsoletes RFC 5706, replacing it completely and updating it with new operational and management techniques and mechanisms. It also updates RFC 2360 to obsolete mandatory MIB creation and introduces a requirement to include an "Operational Considerations" section in new RFCs in the IETF Stream.},
}