%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-pce-rfc7150bis instead of this I-D. @techreport{farrel-pce-rfc7150bis-01, number = {draft-farrel-pce-rfc7150bis-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-farrel-pce-rfc7150bis/01/}, author = {Fatai Zhang and Adrian Farrel}, title = {{Conveying Vendor-Specific Constraints in the Path Computation Element communication Protocol}}, pagetotal = 12, year = 2014, month = jul, day = 21, abstract = {The Path Computation Element communication Protocol (PCEP) is used to convey path computation requests and responses both between Path Computation Clients (PCCs) and Path Computation Elements (PCEs) and between cooperating PCEs. In PCEP, the path computation requests carry details of the constraints and objective functions that the PCC wishes the PCE to apply in its computation. This document defines a facility to carry vendor-specific information in PCEP using a dedicated object and a new Type-Length-Variable that can be carried in any existing PCEP object. This document obsoletes RFC 7150. The only change from that document is the allocation of a different code point for the VENDOR-INFORMATION object.}, }