djcl@contact.uucp (woody) (03/26/91)
Bell Canada has just announced that the new area code to be formed in splitting 416 will be 905 ... perhaps inferior to another choice like 210 in some respects, but that's the word out in the media as of today. The split will see areas in 416 outside Toronto change to 905 starting in the fall of '93. Mandatory dialing should be complete in early '94. More details and discussion on this later, or from other correspondents.
cmoore@brl.mil (Carl Moore) (03/26/91)
Is 905 (the newly-announced code for area to split from 416) to include the area bordering on 705? The bordering on 705 would make (as Woody pointed out in an old message) 706, the other former pseudo area code for parts of Mexico, a poor choice. Someone else's old note pointed out that when a new area code was being selected for the Oakland (California) area, 909 was a poor choice because it looked a little too much like neighboring area code 707. (Later, we heard of 510 being selected for Oakland and 909 being selected for Riverside and San Bernardino counties in southern California.) Did you notice that 301 has bordered 302 for as long as there have been area codes? (These are the codes for Maryland and Delaware respectively.) Maybe that was why eastern Maryland was picked to get area code 410, so that 301 and 302 will no longer touch. Also, 301, which (before 410 split) covers all of Maryland; touches one exchange area of area 412 in Pennsylvania; the Maryland portion touching area 412 will stay in 301.
TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony Harminc) (03/29/91)
In TELECOM Digest V#11 Issue 243 Carl Moore writes: > Is 905 (the newly-announced code for area to split from 416) to > include the area bordering on 705? The bordering on 705 would make > (as Woody pointed out in an old message) 706, the other former pseudo > area code for parts of Mexico, a poor choice. .... Yes -- 905 will border on 705. Not a great choice. Then again 410 would not have been good next to 416. Last time I looked in a California phone book (February) 905 was still listed as a valid way to reach Mexico city for those without what in the USA is quaintly called IDDD (International Direct Distance Dialing). Oh yes -- whatever happened to 903 ? This used to be for Northwest Mexico. Finally, what is the current plan when the N10 codes are gone ? The old plan called for CO (NNX) codes to be used for area codes, starting with 260. Is that still in the works ? That would require 10 digit dialing everywhere in North America (or timeout nonsense).
cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB) (03/30/91)
The code Woody had written about as a possibility for the splitoff from 416 was 210, not 410. (This was before 905 was announced.) 410 has already been announced as new area code for eastern Maryland. 903 came into use as an area code last year by splitting 214 in Texas. And yes, when N0X/N1X area codes are used up, area codes will have to generalize to NXX form. As I explain in my area code history file, this causes dialing changes so that timeouts can be avoided; if your area has had to program for N0X/N1X PREFIXES, you already have allowed for NNX area codes.
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) (03/31/91)
In article <telecom11.250.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony Harminc) writes: > Finally, what is the current plan when the N10 codes are gone ? The > old plan called for CO (NNX) codes to be used for area codes, starting > with 260. Is that still in the works? That would require ten digit > dialing everywhere in North America (or timeout nonsense). The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) Dave Levenson Internet: dave@westmark.com Westmark, Inc. UUCP: {uunet | rutgers | att}!westmark!dave Warren, NJ, USA AT&T Mail: !westmark!dave Voice: 908 647 0900 Fax: 908 647 6857
alex@ames.arc.nasa.gov> (04/09/91)
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: > In article <telecom11.250.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony > Harminc) writes: > The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten > digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no > sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls > intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an > exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- > friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an > area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a > 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) At least in Pac*Swell's southern area, this isn't QUITE true: there *IS* a 213-213 exchange; actually, a "psuedo-exchange"; the Big Book of Prefixes (Higdon will doubtless give out the real name:-) for the L.A. LATA lists 213-213 as "Pseudo-POTS for local 800 service" or something. The indication I got was that it wasn't a "public" exchange, but one for phones the Great Unwashed should never see. Yes, there was also a 213-818, an 818-818 and an 818-213 as I recall. I think they had the same kind of designations. Not a phone-weeny, just leafing through my roommate's stuff, Alex Pournelle, freelance thinker Also: Workman & Associates, Data recovery for PCs, Macs, others ...elroy!grian!alex; BIX: alex; voice: (818) 791-7979 fax: (818) 794-2297 bbs: 791-1013; 8N1 24/12/3 BIX: alex
luce@uunet.uu.net> (04/12/91)
In article <telecom11.278.7@eecs.nwu.edu> elroy!grian!alex@ames.arc. nasa.gov (Alex Pournelle) writes: > Not a phone-weeny, just leafing through my roommate's stuff, Sorta like a Chaos ROOM as opposed to a Manor, eh? John Luce Alcatel Network Systems Raleigh, NC Standard Disclaimer Applies 919-850-6787 aurs01!aurw46!luce@mcnc.org or ...!mcnc!aurgate!luce or John.Luce@f130.n151.z1.fidonet.org
andreap@ms.uky.edu (Peach) (04/13/91)
elroy!grian!alex@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Alex Pournelle) writes: > dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) writes: >> In article <telecom11.250.1@eecs.nwu.edu>, TONY@mcgill1.bitnet (Tony >> Harminc) writes: >> The plan is to use seven digits for all intra-NPA calls, and 1 + ten >> digits for all inter-NPA calls. No timeouts, no ambiguity, and no >> sure way to tell the difference between local and toll calls >> intra-NPA. Any NXX number can then be used as an area code, and as an >> exchange prefix within any area code. In the interest of user- >> friendliness, Bellcore recommends not assigning the same NXX as an >> area code and as a prefix within the area code. (So we won't have a >> 201-201 central office in Northern NJ.) > At least in Pac*Swell's southern area, this isn't QUITE true: there > *IS* a 213-213 exchange; actually, a "psuedo-exchange"; the Big Book > of Prefixes (Higdon will doubtless give out the real name:-) for the > L.A. LATA lists 213-213 as "Pseudo-POTS for local 800 service" or > something. The indication I got was that it wasn't a "public" > exchange, but one for phones the Great Unwashed should never see. > Yes, there was also a 213-818, an 818-818 and an 818-213 as I recall. I am just a novice at this stuff, but are you saying they are changing the rules about area codes? Prefixes that have a center digit of one or zero can no longer be assumed to be an area code? Is this a nationwide change? Harold G. Peach, Jr. Internet: hgpeach@ca.uky.edu 252 Ag. Engineering Bldg., U.Ky. Packet Radio: N4FLZ@KF4NB.KY.USA.NA Lexington, KY 40546-0276 Phone: (606) 257-3335 [Moderator's Note: The rules about *area codes* are going to change in a few years when area codes can have other than zero or one as their second digit. The rule about the third digit of an area code having to be two through nine has already changed. Now we see a limited number of zeros as the third digit in area codes, but you still never see a third digit of one. It was *prefixes* in the past which never had zero or one in the second digit. And several years ago, a prefix never had zero as the third digit; nor as a rule were prefixes duplicated in adjacent area codes, or similar-looking area codes placed adjacent to each other. Big cities got 'short pull' area codes and small towns got 'long pull' area codes. The explosive growth in telephone services requiring individual numbers in the past few years has forced the old rules to be abandoned. We can still safely say if the second and third digits are both one, or both zero, the three digits make up some special service code rather than an area code or a prefix. PAT]