%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-historic instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-exprmntl-03,
    number =    {draft-ietf-v6ops-natpt-to-exprmntl-03},
    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-v6ops-natpt-to-exprmntl/03/},
    author =    {Cedric Aoun and Elwyn B. Davies},
    title =     {{Reasons to Move NAT-PT to Experimental}},
    pagetotal = 25,
    year =      2005,
    month =     oct,
    day =       21,
    abstract =  {This document discusses issues with the specific form of IPv6-IPv4 protocol translation mechanism implemented by the Network Address Translator - Protocol Translator (NAT-PT) defined in RFC 2766. These issues are sufficiently serious that recommending RFC 2766 as a general purpose transition mechanism is no longer desirable, and this document recommends that the IETF should reclassify RFC 2766 from Standards Track to Experimental status.},
}