Talk:IP address

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Networking (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Networking task force (marked as Top-importance).
WikiProject Technology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for IP address:
  • Add a section about the different types of notation (dotted decimal notation, hexadecimal, binary, etc.)
  • Some history
  • How many IP addresses are static vs. dynamic?
  • A section on IP address assignation, which mentions IANA and a short description of the hierarchy. It could probably include the information from "International IP ranges" on the Talk page.
  • Add authoritative regular expressions for IPv4 and IPv6 addresses
Priority 1 (top)


I suggest that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/IP Address conflict be merged into this article.   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 21:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Oppose as delete the address conflict article. Vague, wooly and WP:NOTHOWTO. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Oppose. The request actually was unintelligible and I removed the hat tag. Makes no sense. Kbrose (talk) 00:41, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
If "Internet protocol design does not follow OSI models", what does it follow?   — Jeff G. ツ (talk) 05:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
The IETF has never concerned itself with OSI stuff. Read the articles here, they make it pretty clear that the Internet is based on the Internet Protocol Suite. Kbrose (talk) 22:09, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
IP address conflict is definitely a notable topic and deserves discussion on the encylopedia either as a new section in this article or as a stand-alone article. However, as others here have pointed out, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/IP Address conflict is not the kind of coverage we're looking for. ~KvnG 14:18, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 March 2015[edit]

Paste of an entire article removed (talk) 15:00, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done This is not the place to post suggested articles; please try articles for creation - however, you will need to show there has been significant coverage, in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. - Arjayay (talk) 15:28, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

First paragraph of lede[edit]

An Internet Protocol address (IP address) is a numerical label assigned to each device (e.g., computer, printer) participating in a computer network that uses the Internet Protocol for communication.[1] An IP address serves two principal functions: host or network interface identification and location addressing. Its role has been characterized as follows: "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how to get there."[2]

I have something to note about this lede paragraph, still I do not feel confident enough to change it and may not be entirely correct so I am just bringing attention to it here on the talk page.

I think it should be made completely explicit that a "device (e.g. computer, printer)" can have more than one IP address, as IP addresses are allocated to network interfaces (e.g. wireless card, Ethernet port) rather than the device per se? (ref section 4.4.2, Computer Networking - A Top Down Appreach 6e) As it stands, this first sentence implies a one-to-one relationship between IP addresses and devices such as computers and printers.

Zynwyx (talk) 11:40, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

The paragraph is essentially incorrect because an IP address is assigned to an interface (network card). However, the complete story would probably be unnecessarily complex in the introduction, since an accurate statement would point out that each interface can have multiple IP addresses. However, in a big-picture sense the paragraph is correct because if computer A wants to send a packet to computer B, A must find an IP for B, then send to that IP. A does not care what interface on B has the IP—from A's point of view the IP is a numerical label assigned to B, and A does not care how many IPs have been assigned to B—if the DNS query yields several IPs, A just picks one of them. Johnuniq (talk) 00:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Johnuniq that the lead has the big picture correct. It also fairly accurately summarizes the body of the article which is what we want. The body does not discuss the possibility of multiple interfaces and multiple IP addresses per interface. A contribution to the body describing this would be welcome. Once that's in, we can consider adding something to the lead that summarizes it. --Kvng (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
Yes, looking in terms of the big picture the sentence seems adequate now. Thanks Zynwyx (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2015[edit]

The heading of § Public addresses contains a {{visible anchor}} which causes edit summaries to link to #{{visible anchor|Public address}}es, which is a broken link (see the edit summaries shown here as an example). Please remove the extra anchor from the section heading and add it with {{anchor}} either above or below the line with the heading. (talk) 04:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

No, and please do not do that on other pages. If I had some time I would investigate and revert. Check the talk page and archives at Template:Anchor. The exhaustive discussions have demonstrated that there is no good place to put an anchor, and putting it in the heading is the least bad. I'm not sure if you are referring to the text that is visible in the edit summary, or to the section link in the arrow shown before the edit summary in the page history. A very quick look makes me think that the section link is broken by {{vanchor}}, but I don't think it is broken by {{anchor}}. That needs investigation, perhaps at WP:VPT. Johnuniq (talk) 05:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
@Johnuniq: Any template within a heading breaks the default edit summary link. But, understood. And in my parenthetical, I was referring to the broken links. — (talk) 07:10, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
As I mentioned, there is no good solution. I asked for advice at WP:VPT#Broken anchor links. Johnuniq (talk) 08:20, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 July 2015[edit]

i want to add my research in it also..... which i think is a new research and many ones will not be knowing this i researched for it,so thought about sharing it its about "4-octet principle" of assigning IP address is must which is not the case anyway allow me to please share my research that everyone can know about it. (talk) 15:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done Since you are not an autoconfirmed user, you cannot put that into the article yourself. However, you can let someone else do it for you. Please leave what you want added to the article below. Datbubblegumdoe (talk) 15:26, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Note: However, if, as you say, it your research, it will not be added to the article, as Wikipedia has a policy of No original research. All information has to be verifiable by having been published in a reputable newspaper, magazine, journal or book. - Arjayay (talk) 15:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)