ion 64.702 of the Commission's Rules and Regulations, Report and Order, CC Docket No. 85-229, 104 FCC 2d 958 and 9 (1986); also 2 FCC Rcd 3072 (1987) (Phase II Order). [13] The author notes that numerous co-workers at Digital Equipment Corporation had worked on Antelope prior to 1980, including an ambitious file service machine, based on a VAX computer, that never came to fruition. [14] Note the initials, which allude to a company that had previously pursued a similar strategy with regard to its leased base of large computers. While the Bell Operating Companies retained the Centrex lines themselves, the telephone instruments on users' desks were part of the embedded base and transferred to AT&T. After divestiture, a new subset of the interconnect industry was created to support Centrex with the requisite CPE; these companies were often sales agents for the RBOCs and received commissions on Centrex lines. The term "tie line" is generally applied to these leased lines between customer switching systems, such as PBX and Centrex systems. [17] Sam Wyly's "official" Web site includes this 1975 article about Datran's then-current plans (see http://www.samwyly.net/highway.html See, for instance, Krause, J., "Free Voice-over-IP," CED Magazine, April 2003, http:// www.cedmagazine.com/ced/2003/0403/04cc.htm. Its analogy of Execunet to VoIP is apt. MCI Telecommunications Corp. vs. FCC, 580 FCC 2d 590, U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit (1978). See TELECOM Digest posting by Ron Havens (http://www.yarchive.net/phone/ sprint.html), which also notes how the Sprint name was the result of an employee contest that followed the court's Execunet II ruling. FCC Docket 20097, Resale and Shared Use, 60 FCC 2d 261. Borchardt, K., The Exchange Network Facilities for Interim Access (ENFIA) Interim Settle- ment Agreement, Harvard University Program on Information Resources Policy, 1979. Kellogg, M., P. Huber, and J. Thorne, Federal Telecommunications Law (Second Edition), Aspen Publishers, 1999, citing MCI vs. AT&T, 708 FCC