%% You should probably cite rfc7389 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-netext-pmip-cp-up-separation-04,
    number =    {draft-ietf-netext-pmip-cp-up-separation-04},
    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-netext-pmip-cp-up-separation/04/},
    author =    {Ryuji Wakikawa and Rajesh Pazhyannur and Sri Gundavelli and Charles E. Perkins},
    title =     {{Separation of Control and User Plane for Proxy Mobile IPv6}},
    pagetotal = 10,
    year =      2014,
    month =     jun,
    day =       18,
    abstract =  {This document specifies a method to split the Control Plane (CP) and User Plane (UP) for a Proxy Mobile IPv6 based network infrastructure. Existing specifications allow a mobile access gateway (MAG) to separate its control and user plane using the Alternate Care of address mobility option for IPv6, or Alternate IPv4 Care of Address option for IPv4. However, the current specification does not provide any mechanism allowing the local mobility anchor (LMA) to perform an analogous functional split. To remedy that shortcoming, this document specifies a mobility option enabling a LMA to provide an alternate LMA address to be used for the bi-directional user plane traffic between the MAG and LMA. With this new option, a LMA will be able to use an IP address for its user plane which is different than the IP address used for the control plane.},
}