@techreport{li-rtgwg-gip6-protocol-ext-requirements-03,
    number =    {draft-li-rtgwg-gip6-protocol-ext-requirements-03},
    type =      {Internet-Draft},
    institution =   {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force},
    note =      {Work in Progress},
    url =       {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-rtgwg-gip6-protocol-ext-requirements/03/},
    author =    {Xinxin Yi and Zhenbin Li and Qiangzhou Gao and Bing Liu and Tianran Zhou and Shuping Peng},
    title =     {{Scenarios and Protocol Extension Requirements of a Generalized IPv6 Tunnel}},
    pagetotal = 11,
    year =      2025,
    month =     mar,
    day =       3,
    abstract =  {IPv6 provides extension header mechanism for additional functions. There are emerging features based on the extension headers, such as SRv6, Network Slicing, Alternate Marking, iOAM, DetNet etc. In some networks, the operators might want to leverage these new features but since the network system still using some lagecy encapsulations other than IPv6 (e.g. VxLAN, GRE etc.), these features are just not applicable for them. This document introduces some cases of such scenarios, and discusses the potential requirement of defining a new Generalized IPv6 Tunnel (GIP6). With GIP6, all the additional functions defined as IPv6 extension headers could be easily supported, so that the legacy encapsulations could migrate to a unified solution rather than sccaterred upgrade in each legacy technologies, which is heavy burden for the industry. Considering network devices have different capabilities of IPv6 extension header processing, this document also analyses the issues found during the deployment of the above new features using IPv6 extension headers and the protocol extension requirements for IPv6 capability advertisement are defined.},
}