BL> A better idea would be to use a fixed-length header padded
BL> with spaces, so that both the packet header and the message
BL> header are defined separately from the null termination, and
BL> could be made failsafe.

rc> When FTS-1 was first defined, everything was sent uncompressed,
rc> so packet size was an issue. These days it's irrelevant when
rc> everything is compressed, so a fixed size header would be a
rc> good idea, and practical to boot.

AC> A good idea, perhaps, provided any unused bytes are null-padded
AC> (or zero-padded) to optimise compression (not just null-terminated.)

Yeah, its taking quite a while for the essentials on what makes
a good compressible file to be common in the data structures.

AC> Instead of designing a new header, why not remove the header
AC> completely and replace it with a set of kludge lines?

The main argument against doing that is that its a lot quicker with
decent code to process the fixed header stuff for the fields that are
appropriate in a fixed header. Basically those that are used in almost
every message.

Kludge lines are better for the stuff which is only used occasionally,
optional fields like say the character set used in the message body
and the variable length stuff where you may want repeated use of a
particular one.

--- PQWK202