%% You should probably cite draft-dickson-sidr-route-leak-def-03 instead of this revision.
@techreport{dickson-sidr-route-leak-def-01,
    number =    {draft-dickson-sidr-route-leak-def-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-dickson-sidr-route-leak-def/01/},
    author =    {Brian Dickson},
    title =     {{Route Leaks -- Definitions}},
    pagetotal = 9,
    year =      2012,
    month =     mar,
    day =       5,
    abstract =  {The Border Gateway Protocol, version 4, (BGP4) provides the means to advertise reachability for IP prefixes. This reachability information is propagated in a peer-to-peer topology. Sometimes routes are announced to peers for which the local peering policy does not permit. And sometimes routes are propagated indiscriminantly, once they have been accepted. This document considers the situations that can lead to routes being leaked, and tries to find acceptable definitions for describing these scenarios. The purpose of these definitions is to facilitate analysis of what a route leak is, and what the scope of the problem space for route leaks is. This, in turn, is intended to inform a requirements document for detection of (and prevention of) route leaks. And finally, the definitions and requirements are intended to allow proposed solutions which meet these criteria, and to facilitate evaluation of proposed solutions. The fundamental objective is to "solve the route leaks problem".},
}