%% You should probably cite rfc6780 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-ccamp-assoc-ext-06,
    number =    {draft-ietf-ccamp-assoc-ext-06},
    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-ccamp-assoc-ext/06/},
    author =    {Lou Berger and François Le Faucheur and Ashok Narayanan},
    title =     {{RSVP ASSOCIATION Object Extensions}},
    pagetotal = 17,
    year =      2012,
    month =     sep,
    day =       21,
    abstract =  {The RSVP ASSOCIATION object was defined in the context of GMPLS-controlled Label Switched Paths (LSPs). In this context, the object is used to associate recovery LSPs with the LSP they are protecting. This object also has broader applicability as a mechanism to associate RSVP state. This document defines how the ASSOCIATION object can be more generally applied. This document also defines Extended ASSOCIATION objects that, in particular, can be used in the context of the MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP). This document updates RFC 2205, RFC 3209, and RFC 3473. It also generalizes the definition of the Association ID field defined in RFC 4872. {[}STANDARDS-TRACK{]}},
}