> 1. no current nodes are disenfranchised

This has already happened.

I am sure this annoys many powers-that-be, but MHO of the FTS-1 requirement
is that it's nothing short of pathetic. The problem isn't mainly (as usual)
a technical one, but political. There's a policy, the policy mentions
FTS-1, end of story. Policy being rewritten? Yeah, right.. the contents of
FTS-1 being replaced? Yeah, right..

It may not be as noticeable in the Z1 nodelist segment (yet), but in Z2,
there are already many systems that are not, per-se, policy compliant.
Those that run pure (i.e. with no A/D capable equipment behind) ISDN lines
can only connect to those systems with compatible hardware. Sure, they can
do FTS-1, but who cares? Since the XYZ mailer for my Archimedes with a
Neato V.Everything cannot connect to the machine.

Furthermore, these systems have 300 in the BPS rate nodelist field. Why?
Who knows.. probably because putting 64000 in the baudrate field would
break some implementations (yes, I'm guilty of this too with older versions
of FrontDoor).

There are problems with some Bell vs. CCITT protocol implementations
(modems), where one cannot connect with the other. They may both be listed
as 1200 BPS in the nodelist, they both have 1200 BPS modems, and run FTS-1
compliant software - but they can't connect because their modems won't
talk.

Same thing with many V.FC implementations.

In the ISDN case, who's breaking policy? The ISDN nodes or the analog nodes?

---