On Sun, Dec 10, 2000 at 04:08:58PM -0800, Nathan Myers wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 07, 2000 at 02:28:28PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Given all that, here is a proposed spec for the header:
> > ...
> > Comments?
>
> (I have also suggested, in private mail, that the "header length"
> field should be the length of the whole header, not just whatever
> was added on in versions 2..n. Tom didn't agree.)
I had the same thought, but didn't get around to posting it.
Ross
