%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-ccamp-path-key-ero instead of this I-D.
@techreport{bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-01,
    number =    {draft-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-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-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero/01/},
    author =    {Richard Bradford and JP Vasseur},
    title =     {{RSVP Extensions for Path Key Support}},
    pagetotal = 8,
    year =      2008,
    month =     feb,
    day =       24,
    abstract =  {Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) may be computed by Path Computation Elements (PCEs). Where the TE LSP crosses multiple domains, such as Autonomous Systems (ASes), the path may be computed by multiple PCEs that cooperate, with each responsible for computing a segment of the path. To preserve confidentiality of topology with each AS, the PCE supports a mechanism to hide the contents of a segment of a path, called the Confidential Path Segment (CPS), by encoding the contents as a Path Key Subobject (PKS). This document describes the addition of this information to Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) signaling by inclusion in the Explicit Route Object (ERO) and Record Route Object (RRO).},
}