%% You should probably cite draft-villamizar-mpls-multipath-extn instead of this I-D.
@techreport{villamizar-mpls-tp-multipath-te-extn-02,
    number =    {draft-villamizar-mpls-tp-multipath-te-extn-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-villamizar-mpls-tp-multipath-te-extn/02/},
    author =    {Curtis Villamizar},
    title =     {{Multipath Extensions for MPLS Traffic Engineering}},
    pagetotal = 30,
    year =      2012,
    month =     oct,
    day =       7,
    abstract =  {Extensions to OSPF-TE, ISIS-TE, and RSVP-TE are defined in support of carrying LSP with strict packet ordering requirements over multipath and and carrying LSP with strict packet ordering requirements within LSP without violating requirements to maintain packet ordering. LSP with strict packet ordering requirements include MPLS-TP LSP. OSPF-TE and ISIS-TE extensions defined here indicate node and link capability regarding support for ordered aggregates of traffic, multipath traffic distribution, and abilities to support multipath load distribution differently per LSP. RSVP-TE extensions either identifies an LSP as requiring strict packet order, or identifies an LSP as carrying one or more LSP that requires strict packet order further down in the label stack, or identifies an LSP as having no restrictions on packet ordering except the restriction to avoid reordering microflows. In addition an extension indicates whether the first nibble of payload will reliably indicate whether payload is IPv4, IPv6, or other type of payload, most notably pseudowire using a pseudowire control word.},
}