%% You should probably cite rfc6751 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{despres-6a44-01,
    number =    {draft-despres-6a44-01},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-despres-6a44/01/},
    author =    {Rémi Després and Dan Wing and Sheng Jiang},
    title =     {{Native IPv6 Behind NAT44 CPEs (6a44)}},
    pagetotal = 32,
    year =      2012,
    month =     apr,
    day =       23,
    abstract =  {In customer sites having IPv4-only CPEs, Teredo provides a last resort IPv6 connectivity {[}RFC4380{]} {[}RFC5991{]} {[}RFC6081{]}. However, because it is designed to work without involvement of Internet service providers, it has significant limitations (connectivity between IPv6 native addresses and Teredo addresses is uncertain; connectivity between Teredo addresses fails for some combinations of NAT types). 6a44 is a complementary solution that, being base on ISP cooperation, avoids these limitations. 6a44 uses specific prefixes assigned by local ISPs (rather than the anycast address used by Teredo, an evolution similar to that from 6to4 to 6rd). The specification is complete enough for actual deployment, including with independently written codes.},
}