%% You should probably cite draft-iannone-ip-addressing-considerations instead of this I-D.
@techreport{iannone-internet-addressing-considerations-01,
    number =    {draft-iannone-internet-addressing-considerations-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-iannone-internet-addressing-considerations/01/},
    author =    {Luigi Iannone and Dirk Trossen and Paulo Mendes and Nirmala Shenoy and Laurent Toutain and Abraham Chen and Dino Farinacci and Jens Finkhäuser and Yihao Jia},
    title =     {{Internet Addressing Considerations}},
    pagetotal = 46,
    year =      2022,
    month =     sep,
    day =       5,
    abstract =  {There exist many extensions to Internet addressing, as it is defined in RFC 791 for IPv4 and RFC 8200 for IPv6, respectively. Those extensions have been developed to evolve the addressing capabilities beyond the basic properties of Internet addressing. This document outlines those properties as a baseline against which the extensions are categorized in terms of methodology used to extend the addressing model, together with examples of solutions doing so. While introducing such extensions, we outline the shortcomings we see with those extensions. This ultimately leads to consider whether or not a more consistent approach to tackling the identified use cases, beyond point-wise extensions as done so far, would be beneficial. The benefits are the ones detailed in the companion document {[}I-D.iannone-scenarios-problems-addressing{]}, where, leveraging on the shortcomings identified in this memo and scenarios provided in {[}I-D.iannone-scenarios-problems-addressing{]}, a clear problem statement is provided.},
}