I will continue comparing two frameworks for reasoning about information dynamics: Epistemic Temporal Logic (ETL) and Dynamic Epistemic Logic (DEL). Specifically, I will discuss the role that protocols play in reasoning about conversational scenarios. In many real interactions between agents, protocol or social convention dictates that some announcements that can happen may not be allowed. For example, in a conversation, it is typically not polite to `blurt everything out at the beginning', as we must speak in small chunks. Other natural protocol rules include `do not repeat yourself', `let others speak in turn', `be honest', and so on. Imposing these rules restricts the legitimate sequences of possible announcements, and this immediately affects the standard validities of Public Announcement Logic. Other examples of protocols occur in puzzles (the ever-present muddy children are only allowed to make epistemic assertions), while interaction with a database, or some physical measuring device, involves only factual assertions. I will examine logical frameworks that explicitly model protocols and logics for reasoning about protocols.