%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller instead of this I-D.
@techreport{zhao-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-03,
    number =    {draft-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-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-zhao-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller/03/},
    author =    {Quintin Zhao and Zhenbin Li and Dhruv Dhody and Chao Zhou},
    title =     {{PCEP Procedures and Protocol Extensions for Using PCE as a Central Controller (PCECC) of LSPs}},
    pagetotal = 36,
    year =      2016,
    month =     mar,
    day =       17,
    abstract =  {In certain networks deployment scenarios, service providers would like to keep all the existing MPLS functionalities in both MPLS and GMPLS while removing the complexity of existing signalling protocols such as LDP and RSVP-TE. In {[}I-D.zhao-pce-central-controller-user-cases{]}, we propose to use the PCE {[}RFC5440{]} as a central controller (PCECC) so that LSP can be calculated/ signalled/initiated and label forwarding entries are downloaded through a centralized PCE server to each network devices along the LSP path while leveraging the existing PCE technologies as much as possible. This draft specify the procedures and PCEP protocol extensions for using the PCE as the central controller and user cases where LSPs are calculated/setup/initiated and label forwarding entries are downloaded through extending the existing PCE architectures and PCEP. This document also discuss the role of PCECC in Segment Routing (SR).},
}