Re: Confusing illustration for 3.2.11

Hmm, given that the option elements all are part of the OPTIONS field
which *is* padded to 4 octet alignment, I think we have the padding we
need to ensure alignment. Any additional padding between individual
option elements doesn't have any impact on the overall parsing of a DIME
record. This differ from how the other fields work and because the
option elements are special in this regard, I think it makes sense not
to require individual padding.

Henrik

>I'm not complaining, but this seems rather inconsistent.  We=20
>were careful to make sure there was padding everywhere else,=20
>but now we don't care whether the individual option elements=20
>are padded.  Seems odd.  We should have padded everywhere or=20
>nowhere.  (Can't imagine how I missed this
>before!)