%% You should probably cite rfc9545 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-22,
    number =    {draft-ietf-spring-mpls-path-segment-22},
    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-spring-mpls-path-segment/22/},
    author =    {Weiqiang Cheng and Han Li and Cheng Li and Rakesh Gandhi and Royi Zigler},
    title =     {{Path Segment Identifier in MPLS Based Segment Routing Network}},
    pagetotal = 17,
    year =      2023,
    month =     nov,
    day =       30,
    abstract =  {A Segment Routing (SR) path is identified by an SR segment list. A sub-set of segments from the segment list cannot be leveraged to distinguish one SR path from another as they may be partially congruent. SR path identification is a pre-requisite for various use-cases such as Performance Measurement, and end-to-end 1+1 path protection. In SR for MPLS data plane (SR-MPLS), an Egress node cannot determine on which SR path a packet traversed the network from the label stack because the segment identifiers are removed from the label stack as the packet transits the network. This document defines Path Segment Identifier(PSID) to identify an SR path on the egress node of the path.},
}