Talk:EtherType

message: I seriously doubt that e.g. 802.3 is "the way we do IP traffic today" as was implied by this article prior to my changes. AFAIK Ethernet Version 2 is and remains the way most Internet Protocol networks are set up.
I do understand that the IEEE most dearly would like 802.3 to be used instead of Ethernet Version 2, and as writers of textbooks and the like tend to listen to people with big mouths they readily sometimes believe that 802.3 is a common protocol. It is not. Ethernet Version 2 is very very common though. It is the default behaviour of e.g. Microsoft Windows and Linux to use Ethernet Version 2.
Prove me wrong - empirically. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nixdorf (talk • contribs) 15:45, 19 December 2002 (UTC (UTC)
:The article no longer says that and, as of 1997, IEEE 802.3 supports using the 2-byte field after the source MAC address as a type field or a length field, by disallowing type field values < 1536. Guy Harris (talk) 23:42, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethernet II Prevalence 

message: Taken from other 802.3 twiki:
IEEE 802.3x-1997 allows the 16-bit field after the MAC addresses to be used as a type field or a length field, so that Ethernet II frames are also valid 802.3 frames in 802.3x-1997 and later versions of the IEEE 802.3 Ethernet standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.149.124.54 (talk • contribs) 12:48, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ant the article now says that. Guy Harris (talk) 23:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  802.3 Compatibility 

message: I would like to suggest that the order in the table is sorted in increasing EtherType value. As it is right now the table is not ordered in a fashion that seems to follow a coherent order.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.110.39.122 (talk) 09:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to have been taken care of at some point. ~KvnG 20:02, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table Order 

message: The list has an Ethertype 0x88b5 used for 'AVB Transport Protocol', although this is reserved for local experimentation by IEEE (as defined in 802a-2003). Maybe this came from an early draft proposal? In any case, it should be removed or updated, but I am not sure if it actually has an assigned type (couldn't find this quickly in the IEEE AVB workgroup pages)
78.108.141.146 (talk) 10:23, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: This is probably referring to IEEE 1722. This standard is not yet ratified. Inclusion is premature. I have deleted it. --Kvng (talk) 16:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

text: Yes, but it doesn't list 0x0800!  I've updated the section to reflect that. Guy Harris (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It does list 0800 now when I just accessed it. Organization "Xerox" and "IPv4 Internet Protocol Version" with a comment pointing to RFC894. 2601:646:C500:119:ED08:AC03:601A:6D39 (talk) 00:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrections? 

message: This comment appears at the beginning of the Example section: 
I don't know who put it there but it's been there for years and seems to be good policy and I have assumed there is consensus on this. ~Kvng (talk) 14:12, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Examples inclusion criteria 

message: Suggest adding AVTP EtherType (0x22F0 - ref. IEEE Std 1722-2016 section 4.4.2) to the table of EtherType values.  62.219.254.22 (talk) 15:00, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: So go ahead and implement your suggestion. Guy Harris (talk) 18:26, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

text: This is not intended to be a comprehensive list. An HTML comment at the top of the section says, "Please don't add any protocol you find here. This is for NOTABLE protocols. Any protocol added should minimally have an article elsewhere on Wikipedia." Although IEEE 1722 is mentioned in Audio Video Bridging, I don't think AVTP meets the requirements set out in the comment. I'm happy to discuss whether the comment reflects what we actually want to include. ~Kvng (talk) 14:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add AVTP Ethertype to the table