%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-idr-bgp-nh-cost-03 instead of this revision.
@techreport{ietf-idr-bgp-nh-cost-02,
    number =    {draft-ietf-idr-bgp-nh-cost-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-idr-bgp-nh-cost/02/},
    author =    {Ilya Varlashkin and Robert Raszuk and Keyur Patel and Manish Bhardwaj and Serpil Bayraktar},
    title =     {{Carrying next-hop cost information in BGP}},
    pagetotal = 10,
    year =      2015,
    month =     may,
    day =       16,
    abstract =  {BGPLS provides a mechanism by which Link state and traffic engineering information can be collected from internal networks and shared with external network routers using BGP. BGPLS defines a new Address Family to exchange this information using BGP. BGP Optimal Route Reflection (ORR) provides a mechanism for a centralized BGP Route Reflector to acheive requirements of a Hot Potato Routing as described in Section 11 of {[}RFC4456{]}. Optimal Route Reflection requires BGP ORR to overwrite the default IGP location placement of the route reflector; which is used for determining cost to the nexthop contained in the path. This draft augments BGPLS and defines a new extensions to exchange cost information to next-hops for the purpose of calculating best path from a peer perspective rather than local BGP speaker own perspective.},
}