%% You should probably cite rfc9753 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-13,
    number =    {draft-ietf-pce-stateful-pce-optional-13},
    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-pce-stateful-pce-optional/13/},
    author =    {Cheng Li and Haomian Zheng and Stephane Litkowski},
    title =     {{Extension for Stateful PCE to allow Optional Processing of PCE Communication Protocol (PCEP) Objects}},
    pagetotal = 12,
    year =      2024,
    month =     nov,
    day =       27,
    abstract =  {This document introduces a mechanism to mark some of the Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) objects as optional during PCEP messages exchange for the Stateful PCE model to allow relaxing some constraints during path computation and setup. This document introduces this relaxation to stateful PCE and updates RFC 8231.},
}