%% You should probably cite draft-khademi-tcpm-alternativebackoff-ecn or draft-khademi-tsvwg-ecn-response instead of this I-D.
@techreport{khademi-alternativebackoff-ecn-01,
    number =    {draft-khademi-alternativebackoff-ecn-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-khademi-alternativebackoff-ecn/01/},
    author =    {Naeem Khademi and Michael Welzl and Dr. Grenville Armitage and Gorry Fairhurst},
    title =     {{TCP Alternative Backoff with ECN (ABE)}},
    pagetotal = 10,
    year =      2015,
    month =     sep,
    day =       22,
    abstract =  {This memo provides an experimental update to RFC3168. It updates the TCP sender-side reaction to a congestion notification received via Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN). ECN-marking can allow a network device to signal congestion at a point before a transport experiences congestion loss or additional queueing delay. The updated method is less conservative than the TCP reaction in response to loss. The intention is to achieve good throughput when the queue at the bottleneck is smaller than the bandwidth-delay-product of the connection. This is more likely when an Active Queue Management (AQM) mechanism has used ECN to CE-mark a packet, than when a packet was lost. Future versions of this document will discuss SCTP as well as other transports using ECN.},
}