%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-pce-multipath instead of this I-D.
@techreport{koldychev-pce-multipath-02,
    number =    {draft-koldychev-pce-multipath-02},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-koldychev-pce-multipath/02/},
    author =    {Mike Koldychev and Siva Sivabalan and Tarek Saad and Vishnu Pavan Beeram and Hooman Bidgoli and Bhupendra Yadav},
    title =     {{PCEP Extensions for Signaling Multipath Information}},
    pagetotal = 15,
    year =      ,
    month =     ,
    day =       ,
    abstract =  {Current PCEP standards allow only one intended and/or actual path to be present in a PCEP report or update. Applications that require multipath support such as SR Policy require an extension to allow signaling multiple intended and/or actual paths within a single PCEP message. This document introduces such an extension. Encoding of multiple intended and/or actual paths is done by encoding multiple Explicit Route Objects (EROs) and/or multiple Record Route Objects (RROs). A special separator object is defined in this document, to facilitate this. This mechanism is applicable to SR-TE and RSVP-TE and is dataplane agnostic.},
}