%% You should probably cite rfc9085 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext-06, number = {draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-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-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-ext/06/}, author = {Stefano Previdi and Ketan Talaulikar and Clarence Filsfils and Hannes Gredler and Mach Chen}, title = {{BGP Link-State extensions for Segment Routing}}, pagetotal = 26, year = 2018, month = apr, day = 11, abstract = {Segment Routing (SR) allows for a flexible definition of end-to-end paths by encoding paths as sequences of topological sub-paths, called "segments". These segments are advertised by routing protocols e.g. by the link state routing protocols (IS-IS, OSPFv2 and OSPFv3) within IGP topologies. This draft defines extensions to the BGP Link-state address-family in order to carry segment routing information via BGP.}, }