Re: The need for two headers

Paul Hoffman / IMC <[email protected]> writes:
> If you feel that there are requirements for what are headers in
> RFC822, state the requirement.

I agree with the substance of what you're saying, but I'd disagree on
a nit: it's OK to use the word "headers" at this stage.  I think it
pretty much goes without saying that the messages will have a
"payload" which is the substance of the message, and "headers" is a
pretty standard term for everything that isn't the payload.

Of course what is payload and what is headers depends on the protocol
level you're looking at.  At the TCP level, it's all payload.  At the
IP level, even the TCP headers are payload.  But it seems likely that
there will be a transport format for messages, part of which we can
refer to for now as "headers".

That said, I emphasise again that I approve of your efforts to make
sure we all keep looking further ahead than the ends of our noses.
-- 
  __  Paul Crowley
\/ o\ [email protected]
/\__/ http://www.ciphergoth.org/