%% You should probably cite rfc9109 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-ntp-port-randomization-01,
    number =    {draft-ietf-ntp-port-randomization-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-ntp-port-randomization/01/},
    author =    {Fernando Gont and Guillermo Gont and Miroslav Lichvar},
    title =     {{Port Randomization in the Network Time Protocol Version 4}},
    pagetotal = 10,
    year =      2020,
    month =     mar,
    day =       9,
    abstract =  {The Network Time Protocol can operate in several modes. Some of these modes are based on the receipt of unsolicited packets, and therefore require the use of a service/well-known port as the local port number. However, in the case of NTP modes where the use of a service/well-known port is not required, employing such well-known/ service port unnecessarily increases the ability of attackers to perform blind/off-path attacks. This document formally updates RFC5905, recommending the use of port randomization for those modes where use of the NTP service port is not required.},
}