%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-ebit-05 instead of this revision.
@techreport{ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-ebit-02,
    number =    {draft-ietf-grow-bmp-tlv-ebit-02},
    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-grow-bmp-tlv-ebit/02/},
    author =    {Paolo Lucente and Yunan Gu},
    title =     {{Support for Enterprise-specific TLVs in the BGP Monitoring Protocol}},
    pagetotal = 7,
    year =      2023,
    month =     mar,
    day =       13,
    abstract =  {Message types defined by the BGP Monitoring Protocol (BMP) do provision for data in TLV - Type, Length, Value - format, either in the shape of a TLV message body, ie. Route Mirroring and Stats Reports, or optional TLVs at the end of a BMP message, ie. Peer Up and Peer Down. However the space for Type value is unique and governed by IANA. To allow the usage of vendor-specific TLVs, a mechanism to define per-vendor Type values is required. In this document we introduce an Enterprise Bit, or E-bit, for such purpose.},
}