%% You should probably cite rfc6478 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-pwe3-static-pw-status-10, number = {draft-ietf-pwe3-static-pw-status-10}, 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-pwe3-static-pw-status/10/}, author = {Luca Martini and George Swallow and Giles Heron and Matthew Bocci}, title = {{Pseudowire Status for Static Pseudowires}}, pagetotal = 13, year = 2011, month = nov, day = 15, abstract = {This document specifies a mechanism to signal Pseudowire (PW) status messages using a PW associated channel (ACh). Such a mechanism is suitable for use where no PW dynamic control plane exits, known as static PWs, or where a Terminating Provider Edge (T-PE) needs to send a PW status message directly to a far-end T-PE. The mechanism allows PW Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) message mapping and PW redundancy to operate on static PWs. This document also updates RFC 5885 in the case when Bi-directional Forwarding Detection (BFD) is used to convey PW status-signaling information. {[}STANDARDS-TRACK{]}}, }