"Sander J. Rabinowitz" <0003829147@mcimail.com> (05/25/91)
Wm. Randolph Franklin recently wrote (portions deleted): > 2. I called NyTel again. They gave me the following list: area codes > 700 and 900; exchanges 394, 540, 550, 970, & 976. > i) How many of you people, who said everyone has the obligation to > know this, knew about 394? > 3. AT&T said that they knew nothing about this and told me to try NyTel. > 4. I tried MCI for fun. They'd never heard of this and didn't know > where to look. The Moderator Noted: > [Moderator's Note: I'd suggest since MCI knew nothing about this, > that folks begin making their 540 calls via MCI, ha-ha ... or Sprint. > Let *them* get stuck with the humongous charge from NY Tel. Before > long they'd learn, and begin intercepting 540 like they do 976. PAT] I did in fact experiment to see if calls in all of the 212 exchanges mentioned by Mr. Franklin would be intercepted by LDCs, using the following five companies: ATT, MCI, US Sprint, Metromedia/ITT, and Allnet. I did this by dialing 10xxx-1-212-yyy-9990, where xxx is the carrier access code and yyy is the toll exchange in question. (I deliberately ended the phone number with 9990 under the assumption that a phone number ending with 9990 rarely exists.) I then listened to the intercept recording, to see where it was coming from. If the recording came from the LDC, it would vary based on the carrier that was selected, while if the recording came from the NyTel, it would not vary, regardless of the carrier, so it would be safe to conclude that the LDC did not intercept the call. The result: Only Allnet intercepted calls made to 212-394; all the other LDCs tested allowed the calls. None of the LDCs allowed calls to any of the other exchanges mentioned in Mr. Franklin's post, with the exception of AT&T, which allowed calls to 212-976. I followed up on this one by dialing 1-212-976-1212 (which is NYC's Weather Line -- I have AT&T as my default LD carrier), and the call went through. Opinion (insert the usual disclaimers here): I hope the situation in New York doesn't become a trend throughout the country. It seems to me that anytime an exchange is used for toll services that is valid for standard calls somewhere else, it's going to inevitably generate quite a bit of confusion, both among customers and telephone companies, and it does appears to be hurting both sides. We've seen what can happen to the customer, but what about the long distance carriers? They have to keep up with all these non-976 exchanges, and so far they're only partially successful, but what about later (when many more exchanges will appear)? And, of course, the local telco has to field all the new complaints over unexpected charges. With all these factors in mind, it seems like there's plenty of incentive to get a nationwide standard established for local toll exchanges, such that a given exchange is known across the country as being either for normal use or for toll services. Sander J. Rabinowitz | sjr@mcimail.com -or- | +1 615 661 4645 Brentwood, Tenn. | sander@attmail.com | 8-)
Scott Hinckley <scott@hsvaic.boeing.com> (05/28/91)
Side note: When I used MCI to dial a 212-394-**** number I recieved the following message, aparently from the 394 exchange: "You have reached a non-working number in the 394 exchange. There is no charge for this call." MCI would not complete a call to a 976 number. Scott Hinckley Internet:scott@hsvaic.boeing.com|UUCP:...!uunet!uw-beaver!bcsaic!hsvaic!scott DISCLAIMER: All contained herein are my opinions, they do not|+1 205 461 2073 represent the opinions or feelings of Boeing or its management| BTN:461-2073