[Guy Harris <guy@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> May I ask what client implementation you have seen this behaviour on?

Windows.  (I don't know whether it's OT or NT - I suspect some version
of NT - nor what version, i.e. 4.0 or 5.0^H^H^H^H2000.)

In any case, it could be simplified, but that'd make it incorrect;
"everything should be made as simple but no simpler".

> looks like the last transaction call to be converted needs a fair bit of
> work.

Why?  The transaction-hashing code is already in now, and it worked for
the non-tvbuffified code, so that shouldn't make a difference.