Hi Rob!

Mar 01 12:58 2017, Rob Swindell wrote to All:

 RS> To help distinguish between FSC-39.4 and FSC-48 packets, I've 
 RS> introduced the term "Type-2e" to refer to FSC-39.4 packets, while 
 RS> "Type-2+" specifically refers to FSC-48 packets. FSC-39.1 packets 
 RS> (lacking the 'capValid' field) remain without a moniker and are 
 RS> usually just interpretted by software as FTS-1 (Stone Age) packets.

My understanding is the same:
FSC-0039 type-2 extended packet header
FSC-0048 type-2+ packet header

 RS> The fact that neither FSC-39 nor FSC-48 were ever ratified (declared 
 RS> standard) by the FTSC adds to the confusion. Does the FTSC plan to 
 RS> address the fact that the most widespread FidoNet packet format(s) 
 RS> is/are not officially standard?

I'd guess, since both packet formats are optional it's ok the 27 years old
documents are FSCs.   

 RS> Open questions I have:
 RS> 1. What was the last version of FSC-1 (anyone have a copy or link?)
 RS> 2. What was the first version of FTS-1 (anyone have a copy or link?)
 RS> 3. Was there ever a version of FTS-1 (not FSC-1) that lacked zone 
 RS> fields?

Please see file echos FTSC and FTSC-OLD or http://ftsc.org.

ciao,
Markus

---