%% You should probably cite rfc9059 instead of this I-D. @techreport{ietf-pce-association-bidir-01, number = {draft-ietf-pce-association-bidir-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-ietf-pce-association-bidir/01/}, author = {Colby Barth and Rakesh Gandhi and Bin Wen}, title = {{PCEP Extensions for Associated Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs)}}, pagetotal = 17, year = 2018, month = may, day = 18, abstract = {The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path computations in response to Path Computation Clients (PCCs) requests. The Stateful PCE extensions allow stateful control of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) using PCEP. This document defines PCEP extensions for grouping two reverse unidirectional MPLS TE LSPs into an Associated Bidirectional LSP when using a Stateful PCE for both PCE-Initiated and PCC-Initiated LSPs as well as when using a Stateless PCE.}, }