%% You should probably cite rfc6656 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-dhc-subnet-alloc-13,
    number =    {draft-ietf-dhc-subnet-alloc-13},
    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-dhc-subnet-alloc/13/},
    author =    {Richard A. Johnson and Kim Kinnear and Mark Stapp},
    title =     {{Description of Cisco Systems' Subnet Allocation Option for DHCPv4}},
    pagetotal = 24,
    year =      2012,
    month =     apr,
    day =       5,
    abstract =  {This memo documents a DHCPv4 option that currently exists and was previously privately defined for the operation and usage of the Cisco Systems' Subnet Allocation Option for DHCPv4. The option is passed between the DHCPv4 Client and the DHCPv4 Server to request dynamic allocation of a subnet, give specifications of the subnet(s) allocated, and report usage statistics. This memo documents the current usage of the option in agreement with RFC 3942, which declares that any preexisting usages of option numbers in the range 128-223 should be documented and that the working group will try to officially assign those numbers to those options. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.},
}