%% You should probably cite rfc8390 instead of this I-D.
@techreport{ietf-teas-lsp-diversity-09,
    number =    {draft-ietf-teas-lsp-diversity-09},
    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-teas-lsp-diversity/09/},
    author =    {Zafar Ali and George Swallow and Fatai Zhang and Dieter Beller},
    title =     {{Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Path Diversity using Exclude Route}},
    pagetotal = 25,
    year =      2017,
    month =     nov,
    day =       13,
    abstract =  {Resource ReSerVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering provides support for the communication of exclusion information during label switched path (LSP) setup. This document specifies two new diversity subobjects for the RSVP eXclude Route Object (XRO) and the Explicit Exclusion Route Subobject (EXRS). Three different mechanisms are defined to accomplish LSP diversity in the provider or core network: the signaled diversity type indicates whether diversity is based on client, path computation engine (PCE), or network assigned identifiers. The solution described in this document is based on the assumption that LSPs are requested sequentially, i.e., the time period between the LSP setup requests for the two LSPs may be relatively long (in the order of days, weeks, months). Re-routing the LSP that was established first and may have existed for some time is not considered.},
}