%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-pce-multipath-10 instead of this revision. @techreport{ietf-pce-multipath-00, number = {draft-ietf-pce-multipath-00}, 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-multipath/00/}, author = {Mike Koldychev and Siva Sivabalan and Tarek Saad and Vishnu Pavan Beeram and Hooman Bidgoli and Bhupendra Yadav and Shuping Peng}, title = {{PCEP Extensions for Signaling Multipath Information}}, pagetotal = 19, year = 2021, month = may, day = 4, abstract = {Current PCEP standards allow only one intended and/or actual path to be present in a PCEP report or update. Applications that require multipath support such as SR Policy require an extension to allow signaling multiple intended and/or actual paths within a single PCEP message. This document introduces such an extension. Encoding of multiple intended and/or actual paths is done by encoding multiple Explicit Route Objects (EROs) and/or multiple Record Route Objects (RROs). A special separator object is defined in this document, to facilitate this. This mechanism is applicable to SR-TE and RSVP-TE and is dataplane agnostic.}, }