Talk:List of IP protocol numbers

HEX numbers
I've added the HEX numbers so that it is easier for programmers to look up their protocols. The List is far away from any main path, so it should not bother the normal surfer. If you have any suggestions, please write it here. And please do not delete the HEX values. Musterstudent (talk) 13:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Occurence
What does the occurrence have to do with anything? SurDin (talk) 15:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The Occurrence section was removed by another editor. For those wondering what that was about see this revision of the article. --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 02:47, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

The name of this article is weird
...Why is the name of this article esentially 'Internet Protocol protocol numbers'? Am I missing something here? JguyTalkDone 17:00, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Because the Internet Protocol is itself able to carry different protocols. These protocols are identified by protocol numbers. Protocol appears twice because we have a protocol within a protocol. --Kvng (talk) 19:36, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

I think "IP in IP" is misleading
Protocol 4 is currently listed like this:

RFC2003 defines IPv4 tunneled in IPv4. (the iana website also refers to RFC2003 in it's list). However it depend on where the number 4 is used which tunneling protocol is used. If it is in a IPv4 packet, IP in IP is probably the correct link. But in a IPv6 packet, it should link to 4in6. And in a Authentication Headers (AH) or Encapsulating Security Payloads (ESP) it should link to IPsec.

So I think it is better to just call it IPv4 and refer to RFC791. (compare this to protocol 41 - which links to IPv6 and not 6in4 or any other encapsulation protocol):

--wimmel (talk) 16:58, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Sound like this is used for several different applications. I would propose that we add a note to the entry explaining this. Here's the wiki syntax for notes. --Kvng (talk) 14:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Obsolete
It would be helpful to know which of these protocol numbers became obsolete. I suggest to add a column Obsolete with the date or the RFC that made them obsolete. Theking2 (talk) 09:38, 1 July 2013 (UTC)


 * obsolete is a de-faqto category, finding which rfc caused the last user or potential user to take a course that would not involve that protocol number is very hard. TristanDC (talk) 11:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Value?
This list does not appear to provide any encyclopedic value compared to the list published by IANA. I'm tempted to WP:PROD it to save us the hassle of maintaining it. ~KvnG 17:05, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
 * One value is that it has wikilinks to articles about each of the protocols. The Internet protocol list is very rarely changed and so the maintenance load is low. --Marc Kupper&#124;talk 02:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of IP protocol numbers. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927024510/http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/714x0b2.pdf to http://public.ccsds.org/publications/archive/714x0b2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:28, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

IPsec
Protocols 50 and 51 are, collectively, IPsec.

Would anyone object if I changed:

0x32 	50 	ESP 	Encapsulating Security Payload 	RFC 4303 0x33 	51 	AH 	Authentication Header 	RFC 4302

To:

0x32 	50 	ESP 	Encapsulating Security Payload (IPsec) 	RFC 4303 0x33 	51 	AH 	Authentication Header (IPsec)	RFC 4302

Regards, Ben Aveling 00:00, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

About protocol 84 duplication
Protocol 84 no longer needs to be listed twice. Sallersanyi (talk) 05:57, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks – SESU is no WP:RS but IANA is authoritative. Since TTP is freshly obsoleted I've added a remark. --Zac67 (talk) 07:27, 4 November 2023 (UTC)