%% You should probably cite rfc9085 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-01, number = {draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-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-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext/01/}, author = {Stefano Previdi and Peter Psenak and Clarence Filsfils and Hannes Gredler and Mach Chen and Jeff Tantsura}, title = {{BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing}}, pagetotal = 36, year = 2017, month = feb, day = 9, abstract = {Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPF and OSPFv3). This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family in order to carry segment information via BGP.}, }