%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-grow-route-leak-detection-mitigation instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation-06,
    number =    {draft-ietf-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation-06},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-idr-route-leak-detection-mitigation/06/},
    author =    {Kotikalapudi Sriram and Doug Montgomery and Brian Dickson and Keyur Patel and Andrei Robachevsky},
    title =     {{Methods for Detection and Mitigation of BGP Route Leaks}},
    pagetotal = 24,
    year =      2017,
    month =     mar,
    day =       7,
    abstract =  {RFC 7908 provides a definition of the route leak problem, and also enumerates several types of route leaks. This document first examines which of those route-leak types are detected and mitigated by the existing origin validation (OV) {[}RFC 6811{]}. It is recognized that OV offers a limited detection and mitigation capability against route leaks. This document specifies enhancements that significantly extend the route-leak prevention, detection, and mitigation capabilities of BGP. One solution component involves intra-AS messaging from ingress router to egress router using a BGP Community or Attribute. This intra-AS messaging prevents the AS from causing route leaks. Another solution component involves carrying a per-hop route-leak protection (RLP) field in BGP updates. The RLP fields are proposed to be carried in a new optional transitive attribute, called BGP RLP attribute. The RLP attribute helps with detection and mitigation of route leaks at ASes downstream from the leaking AS.},
}