bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech.edu (bill) (12/20/90)
[Moderator's Note: I realize this next article sounds stupid. But do
not blame Bill ... don't flame the messanger; but rather, the message
itself and the original author. Read it and we'll chat about it
afterward. PAT]
UPma 12/12 1156 215 area code loses ``1'', gains millions of numbers
By SUE MORGAN
PHILADELPHIA (UPI) -- Telephone numbers aren't a limitless
resource, and phone customers in eastern Pennsylvania will soon feel
the consequences of that fact of life, Bell of Pennsylvania said
Wednesday.
Beginning Jan. 14, customers in the 215 dialing area -- which
includes Philadelphia and its suburbs, Reading, and Allentown -- will
no longer have to dial a "1" before dialing a long-distance number in
that area.
The elimination of the digit will allow Bell to squeeze another 1.6
million new telephone numbers in to the growing area, said Bell
spokesman Tom Duddy.
"People used to think that this (telephone numbers) was a bottomless
resource, like the ocean or the sky, and we're finding out that's not
true," Duddy said. "You use enough of something and you can run out of
it, whether it be the ocean or the sky or telephone numbers."
There are already about 6.4 million telephone numbers assigned in the
215 area, Duddy said.
He said the ubiquitous fax machine and cellular telephone are
partly to blame for the number crunch.
"If you look four or five years ago, how many people had fax
machines? Now everybody has a fax machine. The same thing with
cellular telephones. All these things add more telephone numbers."
The elimination of the "1" for long-distance numbers in the 215
area will only forestall the inevitable -- creation of a new area code
in eastern Pennsylvania, possibly as soon as the mid-1990s.
A new area code was created earlier this year in New Jersey, where
a chunk of the 201 area was split off to form area code 908.
Duddy said the governing body which oversees area codes will not
grant new area codes to local telephone companies until they take all
possible steps, including eliminating the "1."
Customers in the 215 area will be able to dial with or without the
"1" between Jan. 14 and Sept. 23, when the change will become
mandatory.
The spokesman said the phone company is hoping the long transition
period will make customers comfortable with the change. Letters will
be going out next week to residential customers, and the company plans
to do other advertising.
Bell will spend about $1 million to make the change.
Duddy said customers in Pennsylvania's other three calling areas
don't have to worry -- there are plenty of numbers to go around in the
717, 412 and 814 areas.
"Most of those are good way into the 21st century and we don't foresee
having to do anything with those," Duddy said.
----- end of article -----
I've heard of ADDING a "1" to dialing in order to create more NXX
possibilities, but ELIMINATING it to create more numbers? How can
this be?
Not long ago, Southern Bell started to require 1 + 404 for
long-distance calls within the same area code. This allowed them to
use NXX prefixes which were once "area codes" (i.e. 607, 415...).
They were able to get many thousands more numbers. But taking the "1"
out????
Sign me "puzzled",
Bill Berbenich bill@eedsp.gatech.edu
[Moderator's Note: Dear Puzzled -- so am I. If there was ever a
dumber article in the papers I have not seen it, except possibly the
stuff Joe Abernathy writes about the Internet. Talk about misleading
and false information! I wonder how she could have gotten so mixed up
in her report? Assuming that it was a 'typographical error' (ha ha,
blame it on printer's deviltries!) I guess what she was trying to say
was that '1' would be required henceforth in order that area codes
could be used as prefixes. I guess ?? Hopefully the paper will run a
correction soon, but knowing how most papers operate they will
probably brazenly ignore it. Geeze, even I devote entire issues to
correcting my mistakes sometimes. PAT] syd@dsi.com (Syd Weinstein) (12/20/90)
The Inky (local name for it) is not know for its technical savvy, but, in one case she's right. In B of PA 215 land, any call with a 1 was a toll call and without a 1 a local (free or metered as message units call). Ok, now not all of 215 was in your local area. (In fact the map is so lopsided I can call 30 miles south or 2 miles north and stay free, more than 2 miles north is toll). Anyway if I were to dial to that toll it would have been 1+7digits, thus their software treated the N0/1X as a/c and no N[^01]X as non area code. The in 215 no N0/1X exchanges were possible. Now, they are changing to 1+ = 11 digits and no 1 = 7 digits, and thus by dropping the 1, we gain more numbers in 215. Gee, didn't she make that hard. Don't worry, on the Inky could have told us in a Major story that no wonder we feel poor, food prices have been rising at the rate of 7.7% per month since 1982. You figure what rate of inflation that is. Sydney S. Weinstein, CDP, CCP Elm Coordinator Datacomp Systems, Inc. Voice: (215) 947-9900 syd@DSI.COM or dsinc!syd FAX: (215) 938-0235
cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB) (12/20/90)
Puzzled? Should not be. When an area has prefixes of NXX form instead of NNX (as has happened with 404 etc., and is to happen in 1991 with area 215), long distance calls take this form: Within that area: 7D or 1 + NPA + 7D (yes, your own NPA) to other areas: 1 + NPA + 7D. 1 + 7D and NPA + 7D can no longer be used in such cases. They would require timeout.
GREEN@wilma.wharton.upenn.edu (Scott D. Green) (12/21/90)
It's true. I believe I reported it to the Digest when the story first broke several months ago. The issue, of course, is using NPA-appearing prefixes. If one uses 1+N0/1X-xxxx the switch needs to time-out to realize it's not getting another three digits (and an inter-NPA call), right? So, the 1+ will only be used for inter-NPA; anything within 215 (local or long-distance) will be seven digits only. I assume that to place 0+ calls within 215 will require 0+215+xxx-xxxx for a similar reason. Scott
GREEN@wilma.wharton.upenn.edu (Scott D. Green) (12/21/90)
It's true. I believe I reported it to the Digest when the story first broke several months ago. The issue, of course, is using NPA-appearing prefixes. If one uses 1+N0/1X-xxxx the switch needs to time-out to realize it's not getting another three digits (and an inter-NPA call), right? So, the 1+ will only be used for inter-NPA; anything within 215 (local or long-distance) will be seven digits only. I assume that to place 0+ calls within 215 will require 0+215+xxx-xxxx for a similar reason. scott
lfd@lcuxlq.att.com (Leland F Derbenwick) (12/21/90)
Apparently, neither "Puzzled Bill" nor our Moderator has ever lived in an area where an initial "1" meant _any_ toll call. That is, where a "1" would be followed by 10 digits for numbers in another area code, or by 7 digits for toll numbers in your own area code. A straight 7 digit number, with no leading "1", was a local, free call. The advantage of this scheme is that you could never make a call that you thought was free, talk for an hour, and then find out on your bill that you were being charged by the minute. Of course, this has the exact same problem as _never_ having to dial "1": the the first 3 digits after the "1" must distinguish an area code from an exchange, so exchanges must all be of the pattern NNX (in regular expression form, [2-9][2-9][0-9]). So dropping the "1" before 7-digit toll calls allows a "1" to be interpreted as "10-digit number follows", which means that "1" always precedes an area code, and a dialed string without a "1" is always a 7-digit. This allows exchange prefixes to use the NXX pattern, adding all the exchanges with a 0 or 1 in the second digit. Speaking strictly for myself, Lee Derbenwick, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Warren, NJ lfd@cbnewsm.ATT.COM or <wherever>!att!cbnewsm!lfd [Moderator's Note: That's right, I have never lived in such a place. Here in Chicago, what is local to me is toll to a person a few miles away but still within the city. There is no longer any local free calling zone which takes in the whole city. We never could have used the '1 means toll charge' arrangement here since who is to say ahead of time which prefixes would have a '1' in front. The difference between a free call and toll call here is entirely dependent on which central office area you live in. PAT]
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz) (12/21/90)
In article <15527@accuvax.nwu.edu>, bill@gauss (bill) writes: | [Moderator's Note: I realize this next article sounds stupid. But do | not blame Bill ... don't flame the messanger; but rather, the message | itself and the original author. Read it and we'll chat about it | afterward. PAT] It makes perfect sense to me. If I "lose" the "1" for long-distance, I can have a number within 215 that has an exchange that looks like an area code (has 0/1 for second digit). Old system (trying to call 516-7772 number as long distance). 1-516-7772 = system waits for rest of number, thinking it is the beginning of 1-516-777-2nnn, so this number is illegal. New system (still trying to call 516-7772 long distance). 516-7772 = system now knows that this is a complete number. See, I've "lost" the "1" for "long distance". And gained it for "area code follows". I guess living in an area where 1 means long distance gives me the advantage at understanding these statements. For those of you who haven't had "1" mean long distance, taking those statements out of context from the newspaper article must have looked really funny. And since the general population *for that area* has it firmly entrenched that "1 means long distance"... that's indeed what they are losing! (I'm still baffled at what the "1 means long distance" people do when a differing area code is *not* long distance. Do you dial the "1" or not? Around here, if it's a different area code, it's definitely long distance.) Just another person who dials 1 for long distance still, Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn [Moderator's Note: Is Portland, OR to Vancouver, WA a long distance call? What about Troutdale, OR to Camas, WA? What about Ontario, OR to Fruitland, ID? And yes, we dial 1 whenever we change area codes, even though several suburban 708 points are local to me in 312, and are part of my 'eight mile from CO to CO' local free calling area. PAT]
0003382352@mcimail.com (A. Alan Toscano) (12/21/90)
In TELECOM Digest Vol 10, Issue 892, bill <bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech. edu> quotes from a UPI article written by Sue Morgan... >Beginning Jan. 14, customers in the 215 dialing area -- which >includes Philadelphia and its suburbs, Reading, and Allentown -- will >no longer have to dial a "1" before dialing a long-distance number in >that area. Subsequent comments by bill and our Moderator suggest that the article should have said that a '1' would now be REQUIRED instead of being NO LONGER ALLOWED. I disagree. It's my recollection that most, if not all, of Pennsylvania is accustomed to prefixing *ANY* long distance call with a '1' prefix. The article refers to the elimination of a '1' prefix on *INTRA-NPA* calls only. It's confusing because of the vagueness permitted by our English language. "In that area" refers not to the callers location, but to the destination long-distance number. Inter-NPA dialing will not change. A '1' will still be required. Let's recall that in many areas once populated by Step-by-Step switching, a '1' prefix has been used to access equipment able to complete a long distance call. In these areas, the '1' has, over time, taken on the meaning "indicates a Long Distance toll call." Or, to put it another way: "I agree to pay extra money for this call, which I realize is to a location outside of my toll-free calling area." This way of thinking is so deep rooted in my home state of Texas, that, when Southwestern Bell began charging for Directory Assistance, they changed its access number from 411 to 1411. And, subscribers here have complained, after being billed for rather excessive 976 charges, that the Phone Company should require a '1' if it's going to cost extra. The new meaning of '1' as "an area code will follow" will take some getting accustomed to in much of America. A. Alan Toscano Voice: 713 236 6616 MCI Mail: ATOSCANO 0003382352@mcimail.com Telex: 6975956AAT UW CIS: 73300,217
gdias@ucdavis.edu (Gihan Dias) (12/21/90)
In article <15527@accuvax.nwu.edu> bill@eedsp.gatech.edu writes: > Beginning Jan. 14, customers in the 215 dialing area -- which >includes Philadelphia and its suburbs, Reading, and Allentown -- will >no longer have to dial a "1" before dialing a long-distance number in >that area. >The elimination of the digit will allow Bell to squeeze another 1.6 >million new telephone numbers in to the growing area, said Bell >spokesman Tom Duddy. >I've heard of ADDING a "1" to dialing in order to create more NXX >possibilities, but ELIMINATING it to create more numbers? How can >this be? > Not long ago, Southern Bell started to require 1 + 404 for >long-distance calls within the same area code. This allowed them to >use NXX prefixes which were once "area codes" (i.e. 607, 415...). >They were able to get many thousands more numbers. But taking the "1" >out???? What's the problem here? It sounds like what most area codes have to go through before introducing NXX prefixes. For example, when I was in 805-land a few years ago, local calls were seven-digit, long distance calls within the area code were 1 + 7-digit and LD calls outside the area code were 1 + 10 digit. Then GTE (and I presume PacBell) changed the rules so that long distance calls within the area code were no longer preceeded by 1 but consisted of just the seven digits. This seems to be exactly what is happening in 215 now. I assume that this was to allow N [01] X prefixes in the area code to be distinguished from area codes. If a dialled number begins with a 1 then the switch expects 10 more digits, and if it begins with 2-9 then it expects seven more digits for either a local call or a LD call within the area code. The main loss is to subscribers, since now we can no longer distinguish a long distance call within the area code from a local call. Gihan
lyle@dimacs.rutgers.edu (Lyle A. McGeoch) (12/21/90)
Bell Atlantic is clearly going to be using the same dialing rules in 215 as it currently uses in North Jersey (201 and 908). All calls within 215 will be dialed with seven digits. All calls to other area codes will use a 1+ prefix. So the reporter is right ... 215 is losing 1+ dialing on long distance calls within the area code. This change will allow N0N and N1N exchanges within 215. If someone in 215 dials 1+N0N or 1+N1N, the call will be routed to the appropriate area code. Without the 1+ prefix, the call will go to the right exchange in 215. I don't like this system very much ... it makes it too easy to make toll calls that you think are local. Of course the local phone company doesn't mind that. The alternative system, using the area code on all long distance within your own area code, isn't so great either. The newspaper article certainly wasn't very clear. Lyle McGeoch Rutgers University lyle@dimacs.rutgers.edu
sba8_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Scott Barnes) (12/21/90)
> [Moderator's Note: Dear Puzzled -- so am I. If there was ever a > dumber article in the papers I have not seen it, except possibly the > stuff Joe Abernathy writes about the Internet. Talk about misleading > and false information! I wonder how she could have gotten so mixed up > in her report? Assuming that it was a 'typographical error' (ha ha, > blame it on printer's deviltries!) I guess what she was trying to say > was that '1' would be required henceforth in order that area codes > could be used as prefixes. I guess ?? Hopefully the paper will run a Sorry, Pat, but I believe the newspaper reporter was correct. Allow me to quote from an article that appeared here in the Digest three months ago (Volume 10, Issue 685): > The {Philadelphia Daily News} reports on Sept. 18 (and Bell of PA's > Newsline confirms today) that 1+ will be prohibited within 215 after > May 20, 1991. You all know the rest of the story - running out of > prefixes, needing to use prefixes that look like area codes, > forestalling the introduction of a new area code. And, of course, > after 5/20/91 we won't know if we're making a toll call within 215 or > not. I have heard from a different source that Bell of PA intends to implement exchange codes of the type "XXX", so that exchanges such as 131 will now be possible. It is certainly not a case where 1+ dialing is being more stringently enforced. Scott Barnes sba8_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu [Moderator's Note: Where the problem comes up is that for many of us, we never used one plus at all until the need for additional prefixes came up, then we had to start using it on long distance calls in order that area code number combinations could be used as local prefix number combinations. Think of it that way and see how dumb it sounds to say 'forbidding the use of 1' rather than 'you must now use 1'. PAT]
telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) (12/21/90)
Listen, all you people are doing it exactly the *opposite* of what
happened here in Chicago ...
For all the years I can remember we did not have to dial '1' before
anything we did. Our prefixes were always of the form:
(2 through 9) (2 through 9) (1 through 9)
Area codes were the same everywhere:
(2 through 9) (0 or 1) (2 through 9)
Special codes were 211 - long distance operator
411 - directory service
611 - repair service
811 - long distance from PBX's, hotels, etc.
911 - Chicago Emergency Services
There was no conflict since a second digit of zero or one was always a
long distance call or a special code. A second and third digit of one
was always a special code. A second and third digit of zero was always
for services like 700, 800 and 900 calls.
Then they decided they wanted an extra 130 or so prefixes so they
said we would ADD the digit 1 at the start of a call when calling long
distance -- not just any old call within 312 regardless of what it
cost -- but only outside of 312.
Immmediatly after starting 'you must dial one plus the area code' we
began seeing odd prefixes like 606 and 415 (which serves my cell
phone).
We must dial 1-708 or 1-312 when crossing the line from city to
suburbs although it may in fact remain a local toll-free call if that
is what it was before the split.
I guess since the reporter was writing mainly for the Philadelphia
readers her story sort of makes sense.
But generally you ADD 1 -- not delete it -- in order to gain more
prefixes, since by using 1 in front of an area code you are able to
recycle area codes into local area prefixes without having to time out
the dialing after the last digit is entered.
I still think she should have done a better job on that story, and
explained what was going on.
Patrick Townsonsteve@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Steve Schallehn) (12/21/90)
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: >(I'm still baffled at what the "1 means long distance" people do when >a differing area code is *not* long distance. Do you dial the "1" or >not? Around here, if it's a different area code, it's definitely long >distance.) Southwestern Bell provides the answer in Kansas City (a 1+ "toll call" area). Kansas City is situated right on the boarder of Kansas (913) and Missouri (816). In Kansas City, you can call free to anywhere else in the Greater Kansas City area. A seven digit telephone number is all that is required for any call in the Kansas City Area. For long distance calls in your home state, 1+ 7 digits works fine, and for in the adjacent state, the normal 1+ area code + 7 digits. I have often wondered about the wizardry in assigning prefixes. Prefixes have to be unique for the entire Kansas City area. You can't have a 262 prefix on the Kansas side as well as a second 262 prefix on the Missouri side. Steve Schallehn | Internet : steve@matt.ksu.ksu.edu Kansas State University | UUCP : ..!rutgers!ksuvax1!ksuvm.bitnet!steve Manhattan, Kansas 66506 | Bitnet : STEVE@KSUVM
cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov (David Cornutt) (12/21/90)
This sounds like it's just a variation on the rule, which is becoming standard in a lot of places, that you must dial 1 + areacode for *all* long distance calls, and all calls that are not in your areacode (whether toll or not). The difference here is that they are allowing abbreviated dialing within the areacode by just dialing the 7-digit number; if the equipment sees a number 2-9 as the first digit, it assumes that the number begins with "1-215". It was confusing the way the newspaper article worded it. BTW, there's a twist to the 1 + areacode rule that I don't recall seeing discussed here. If a leading 1 means that "area code follows" for all numbers, then presumably, in addition to making NNX-style number available as exchange numbers, it would make NXX-style numbers available as area codes, provided that the whole NANP area could be switched over to this style of dialing. This would seem to solve our areacode shortage problem for many years. Does anyone know if this has been considered? David Cornutt, New Technology Inc., Huntsville, AL (205) 461-6457 (cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov; some insane route applies) "The opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of my employer, not necessarily mine, and probably not necessary."
lfd@lcuxlq.att.com (Leland F Derbenwick) (12/21/90)
In article <15541@accuvax.nwu.edu>, I wrote (and the moderator commented): > Apparently, neither "Puzzled Bill" nor our Moderator has ever lived in > an area where an initial "1" meant _any_ toll call. ... > [Moderator's Note: That's right, I have never lived in such a place. > Here in Chicago, what is local to me is toll to a person a few miles > away but still within the city. There is no longer any local free > calling zone which takes in the whole city. We never could have used > the '1 means toll charge' arrangement here since who is to say ahead > of time which prefixes would have a '1' in front. The difference > between a free call and toll call here is entirely dependent on which > central office area you live in. PAT] That's exactly the sort of situation where 1+7 digits can be very helpful. You've stopped off at a friend's house, and decide to call another friend. Both of them are in _your_ local calling area, but friend two is (unbeknownst to you) a toll call from friend one. With just a seven-digit number, you only find out that it was a toll call when ex-friend one tells you to pay up. With 1 + 7 digits, you know immediately: the 7-digit call gets a "your call cannot be completed as dialed" message. If you still want to call, you put the "1" in front, but you _know_ that it's being charged by the minute. (Admittedly, this sort of thing was a _lot_ more important back when I was a teenager. :-) So how you have to dial a given number will vary depending which central office's area you're in, but it always is based on what's a toll call from there. Perhaps it's an east/west split? This is how it was in Southern New England Telephone territory (Connecticut) and it's just being changed in Pennsylvania. But when I lived in California, it took me a while to get used to _not_ dialing a 1 first. Speaking strictly for myself, Lee Derbenwick, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Warren, NJ lfd@cbnewsm.ATT.COM or <wherever>!att!cbnewsm!lfd
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz) (12/22/90)
In article <15542@accuvax.nwu.edu>, merlyn@iwarp (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: | (I'm still baffled at what the "1 means long distance" people do when | a differing area code is *not* long distance. Do you dial the "1" or | not? Around here, if it's a different area code, it's definitely long | distance.) | [Moderator's Note: Is Portland, OR to Vancouver, WA a long distance | call? What about Troutdale, OR to Camas, WA? What about Ontario, OR | to Fruitland, ID? And yes, we dial 1 whenever we change area codes, | even though several suburban 708 points are local to me in 312, and | are part of my 'eight mile from CO to CO' local free calling area. PAT] Yes, Portland OR to Vancouver WA has *always* been an LD call. And Troutdale OR to Camas WA (and I suspect Ontario to Fruitland, although I don't know that for a fact). I mean, it makes sense to me. It crosses an Area Code Boundary, therefore I have to dial 1, therefore it is long distance! (The thought of someday having no correlation between 1 and long distance still shocks me as bizarre.) A while back, there was talk of putting Vancouver in the 503 area code so that we Oregonians could call it locally. And, in another message, you speak of "local to me is LD to some guy next to me" as a justification for "why 1 means toll is dumb". That happens all the time in Portland. I can call local from Beaverton to Portland. Portland can call local to Gresham and Oregon City. But it's LD for me from Beaverton to Gresham or Oregon City. So the people in Portland know they can call Beaverton, Gresham, or OC directly, and the people in the suburbs have learned more or less what "too far away" is. I'm *glad* I have the "1 means toll", or I'd probably be shocked by my phone bill each time I had to return a call to an unknown number. (They've added a lot of prefixes in the last five years.) "Hmm... return this call to 526-9922. Wonder where it is ... 5-2-6-9-9-2-2 ... [boop bop beep... please dial 1]. Aha. Long distance. Better call it from my client's phone. :-)". Pat, what do you do when returning a call? Do you have all the local prefixes memorized? Do you call the operator each time for a name-place and LD rate? See, it's much simpler here in Oregon. :-) Just another native Portlander, Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn [Moderator's Note: Surprisingly, I do know a few hundred 312/708/815 prefixes in my head. But until your call goes to somewhere outside northern Illinois there is no 'toll charge' as such. Everything here is northern Illinois is rated as 'minutes of use'. Local calls -- that is, calls within your switching center and the switching center immediatly next to yours on any side make up your local 'free' calling area. Regardless of the total minutes used, you are charged only about +/- five cents for the call. Calls to other switching centers in northern Illinois are timed, and 'minutes of use' cost anywhere three or four cents per minute. When you get your bill, you see the total number of minutes tallked during the month. PAT]
pc@ctt.ctt.bellcore.com (Peter Clitherow) (12/22/90)
In article <15537@accuvax.nwu.edu> sba8_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Scott Barnes) writes: > I have heard from a different source that Bell of PA intends to > implement exchange codes of the type "XXX", so that exchanges such as > 131 will now be possible. It is certainly not a case where 1+ dialing > is being more stringently enforced. This sounds totally amazing! How, other than a timeout such as is needed for international calls are LD calls to other NPAs to be discriminated? Consider, that if PA implements the 131 exchange, we could have: 131-2xxx as a local number, and 1312-xxx-xxxx as a LD call to Chicago. I.e. the exchange must wait until a timeout, before completing the first (local) call?! Has anyone else heard of this? pc [Moderator's Note: Well, you know the '#' symbol is almost universally available on touch tone phones these days. Known as the octothorpe and sometimes as a carriage return -- which I guess is functionally what it does -- it has long served as a time-out signal when entering international numbers, calling the local '0' operator (in some places), and when entering just the PIN of your calling card number (when calling the number where the card is assigned). There is no reason people couldn't be trained to stick it on the end of all dialing as a signal they are finished. Then, *any combination* could be a local number, no? PAT]
pf@islington-terrace.csc.ti.com (Paul Fuqua) (12/22/90)
merlyn at iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz) writes: > I'm still baffled at what the "1 means long distance" people do when > a differing area code is *not* long distance. Do you dial the "1" or > not? Around here, if it's a different area code, it's definitely long > distance. Well, I'm a "1 means long distance" person, living in Dallas (214-340), and the article totally confused me. Here, to call a local number in a different area code, one dials ten digits -- no 1+. If it's a long-distance number, it's always eleven digits. (Actually, I only know this to be true for the 214/817 boundary; I don't know what is done about local cross-area-code calls elsewhere in the state, or even if there are any.) It wasn't always this way -- until a couple of years ago, certain exchanges were reserved for "metro" service, and these numbers were local to both Dallas and Fort Worth. They started the ten-digit hack to free up those exchanges for duplication along the boundary. SWBell printed a notice on top of every page in the phone book, listing the affected exchanges. Well, it listed most of them: they left out the GTE exchanges. Area-code-split note: A couple of months ago, there was a newspaper article describing the 214/903 area-code split. It contained one odd fact: there are more than two dozen phone companies serving the area now in 903. Paul Fuqua pf@csc.ti.com, ti-csl!pf Texas Instruments Computer Science Center, Dallas, Texas
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) (12/22/90)
In article <15537@accuvax.nwu.edu>, sba8_ltd@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Scott Barnes) writes: > I have heard from a different source that Bell of PA intends to > implement exchange codes of the type "XXX", so that exchanges such as > 131 will now be possible. I think you must have mis-heard this one. NXX, yes; but I won't believe XXX. Using your "131" example above, there would be ambiguity when the telco received the dialling sequence 1312555. Unless it used a timeout (yuck!), the switch would be unable to distinguish between a local call to 131-2555 and a LD call to Chicago of the form 1-312-555-XXXX. The whole point of cleaning up dialling rules (as Bell of PA is doing now in 215) is to allow NXX exchanges *without* ambiguity or timeouts. Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com 62 Alexander Drive ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
mike@post.att.com (Michael Scott Baldwin) (12/22/90)
This discussion is rather amusing because it shows how ingrained
the two different meanings of "1" are. I happen to be at an
advantage because I grew up in Maryland (1 == long distance) and
live in New Jersey (1 == 10 digits), both of which are going through
area code splits (201/908, 301/410) and changing from NNX to NXX.
I've had intimate contact with all possible permutations, I think!
Here's the deal: Ten years ago, this was the situation:
Maryland New Jersey
Local nnx-xxxx nnx-xxxx
Long, same npa 1-nnx-xxxx nnx-xxxx
Long, another npa 1-npa-nxx-xxxx npa-nxx-xxxx
In NJ you never dialed "1" and in MD you dialed it for *all* long
distance calls, in or out of your area code. As in other areas "1 ==
toll" became very ingrained in Maryland. NOTE: you simply had to know
which exchanges in MD (area 301) were local and which were long,
because you could *not* dial them the other way. For instance, 721
and 490 are long distance, but 721 and 224 are not. If I dialed
"490-xxxx" from 721, I got a recording ("dial 1"). If I dialed
"1-224-xxxx" from 721, I also got a recording ("don't dial 1"). If
presented with a number (301) 892-3423, you would typically dial "1"
if you didn't recognize the exchange ("must be far away" you thought).
If that was wrong, well, you tried again without the "1". There were
not that many exchanges in the local area, even though it was quite
large, so it wasn't a big deal. However, I can imagine lots of simple
folk getting confused by this.
MAJOR ANOMALY: Maryland (301), DC (202) and Virginia (703) are all
very close, and they had overlapping local calling areas. and yes,
you guessed it, to dial a local (202) exchange from (301), you JUST
DIALED 7 DIGITS! No 1, no area code. And to further hose things up,
that same exchange might be used elsewhere in (301)! You see, if
301-335 were really far away from DC, then I would have to dial
"1-335-xxxx" to get it. So "335-xxxx" could be reused, but only near
DC, to mean "202-335-xxxx". So if I were 301-255-xxxx (near DC) and
needed to dial 301-335-xxxx, if I just dialed 335-xxxx, I might
accidentally get DC (but it was free!). Also, if I needed to dial
202-342-xxxx, I COULD NOT dial 1-202-342-xxxx, because it was local!
I had to dial just 342-xxxx. Bleah!
Now, when the time came to use NXX exchanges, New Jersey had a simple
job: simply force "1" for long distance calls. It didn't mean
anything particular, so nobody cared. This caused some unfortunate
confusion. A friend of mine visited from Maryland and asked if they
had to dial "1" to call (201) 234-1234 (whatever it was). Well, since
it was in area code 201, of course you don't. So my friend called and
talked for a while. *I* knew it was a long distance call (quite far
away), so when he hung up I mentioned this -- he was shocked. He
equated "dial 1" with "toll call" so he thought he was talking for
free. Oops for me. Here's NJ now:
New Jersey
same npa 1-npa-nxx-xxxx or nxx-xxxx
another npa 1-npa-nxx-xxxx
Note how it is pleasant that I can *always* dial 1-npa in front of any
number. This is nice for autodialing modems that you have to carry
around with you.
In Maryland the situation, unfortunately, has gotten even more hosed.
still clinging to the "1 == toll" philosophy, but needing more
exchanges, this is the "compromise":
Maryland
Local, same npa nxx-xxxx
Local, another npa npa-nxx-xxxx
Long, any npa 1-npa-nxx-xxxx
So now you dial "1-301-335-xxxx" to dial your own area code,
a '1' 202-335-xxxx" to get the local DC number. How extremely gross.
Now people in Maryland are so confused they (and even I) can't
dial anyone anymore. I had friends try to call my Baltimore number
from Gambrills. It is long distance, but they didn't dial 1-301.
They got some recording that didn't tell them to dial 1-301, so
they gave up. And I was in Virginia (703) trying to call DC.
Well, the hotel phone said "8" for long distance and "9" for local.
8-1-201-nxx-xxxx worked for New Jersey, but 8-1-202-966-xxxx failed
for DC (remember I'm in NPA 703). I try 9-966-xxxx: it fails.
Finally, 9-202-966-xxxx works. I was about to puke. Note that this
new "scheme" actually opens up lots of exchanges. I presume they'll
start using NXX exchanges where NXX != 301/410/703/202 because the
only conflict is in local calling, and there are only four NPA's in
the area. Of course, your poor autodialing modems are seriously out
of luck. You move it a few miles and you might need to totally
reprogram it. (Those hand-held DTMF-ers are also hosed, of course.
Oh well, I thought there were cute!)
By the way, I'm strongly in favor of New Jersey's scheme and it's
time for "1 == toll call" to die a timely death. I hope this
long message was amusing (maybe horrifying) to some of you.
michael.scott.baldwin@att.com (bell laboratories)davec@uunet.uu.net (Dave Close) (12/22/90)
In article <15542@accuvax.nwu.edu> Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn@ iwarp.intel.com> writes: >I guess living in an area where 1 means long distance gives me the >advantage at understanding these statements. For those of you who >haven't had "1" mean long distance, taking those statements out of >context from the newspaper article must have looked really funny. And >since the general population *for that area* has it firmly entrenched >that "1 means long distance"... that's indeed what they are losing! >(I'm still baffled at what the "1 means long distance" people do when >a differing area code is *not* long distance. Do you dial the "1" or >not? Around here, if it's a different area code, it's definitely long >distance.) This relates to a message I posted a month or two back. Here in DFW (north Texas), toll calls always start with a 1, free calls always start without a 1. This includes inter-area code calls: a free call from Dallas to Fort Worth is dialed 817-xxx-xxxx, NOT 1-817-xxx-xxxx which is only used for toll calls. Obviously this reduces the number of possible exchanges in each area slightly. SWB's solution to the problem in PA: Instead of dropping the 1 for intra-area code calls, they require you to dial your OWN area code. A toll call from Dallas to a far suburb in the same area is dialed 1-214-xxx-xxxx. Personally, I prefer the PA solution, but SWB's works. My primary complaint is that I have no way to determine --reliably-- before calling, if a number is a toll call. Therefore, I dial 1+number (with or without area code) and hear, "We're sorry, it is not necessary to dial a one or zero when dialing this number." Sorry, indeed! Why not let the call go through anyway? -- Dave Close, Shared Financial Systems, Dallas davec@shared.com vmail +1 214 458 3850 uunet!shared!davec fax +1 214 458 3876 My comments are my opinions and may not be shared by Shared.
cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB) (12/23/90)
Replying to Steve Schallehn <steve@matt.ksu.ksu.edu>: The instructions vary if you make a local call which crosses an area code boundary. You wrote about the Kansas City area. In the Washington DC area, prefixes had to be unique for the entire area; when prefixes started running short in that area, they were generalized from NNX to NXX, and when they ran short again, the local calling instructions were changed to require the area code (without leading 1) for a local call crossing an area code boundary. Also, Kansas and Missouri each have more than one area code. 1 + 7D there should only work within your own area code (in Kansas City, the area codes are 816 and 913). Replying to David Cornutt <cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov>: The leading 1's meaning "what follows is an area code" makes N0X/N1X numbers (not NNX numbers, which were already available) useable as exchange numbers; in other words, the exchange numbers generalized from NNX to NXX. Yes (from other sources in this Digest), area codes of the form N0X/N1X are projected to run out circa 1995, and then area codes will have to generalize to NXX. Replying to Lyle A. McGeoch <lyle@dimacs.rutgers.edu>: The calling instructions you cite for northern New Jersey (201 and 908) were also put into effect in 609; a message to me on this matter cited statewide uniformity, and there later appeared a special case where local service from Barnegat (609 area) includes two N0X prefixes in Toms River (201, to become 908), with local calls from 609 area to other areas still being seven digits, at least then. Replying to Michael Scott Baldwin <mike@post.att.com>: No, in New Jersey you did not force 1 for long distance calls. You forced 1 in front of an area code (we're not talking about 0+ calls). Long distance within your own area code in New Jersey is just 7D, not affected by the use of N0X/N1X prefixes.
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) (12/23/90)
In article <15571@accuvax.nwu.edu>, cornutt@freedom.msfc.nasa.gov (David Cornutt) writes: > BTW, there's a twist to the 1 + areacode rule that I don't recall > seeing discussed here. If a leading 1 means that "area code follows" > for all numbers, then presumably, in addition to making NNX-style > number available as exchange numbers, it would make NXX-style numbers > available as area codes, provided that the whole NANP area could be > switched over to this style of dialing. This would seem to solve our > areacode shortage problem for many years. Does anyone know if this > has been considered? It has not only been considered, it's been planned. It appears in the Bellcore "Notes on the Intra-LATA Networks". The plan is that all intra-NPA calls will be dialed with seven digits, whether or not a toll charge applies. Moreover, all inter-NPA calls will be dialed as 1 + 10 digits. Non-conforming areas are expected to implement these procedures during the 1990's. It would seem that the 215 area code has just announced such an implementation. In NJ, we've had this in effect for several years. When it has become universal, then there need be no distinction between area codes and 'office' prefix codes. That will allow many existing NPA's to be further sub-divided without exhausting the supply of possible area codes. Note that this numbering plan has worldwide consequences: Any country which permits customer-dialed calls to the US or Canada must implement changes in its dialed-number validation translations before we can move forward with this. 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
gls@odyssey.att.com (George L Sicherman) (12/23/90)
In article <15527@accuvax.nwu.edu>, bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech.edu (bill) writes: > I've heard of ADDING a "1" to dialing in order to create more NXX > possibilities, but ELIMINATING it to create more numbers? How can > this be? It's obvious enough if you think it through. Probably BoP wants to use N0Ns and N1Ns as exchanges. With the change, you will be able to dial: 1-202-234-5678 to reach the Znosko-Cola plant in Newark; 202-2345 to reach Elfonzo's Used Ingots in East Allentown. This simply doesn't work if they let you dial 1 first to reach Elfonzo's Used Ingots. Our esteemed Moderator's afterword has it backwards: [... I guess what she was trying to say was that '1' would be required henceforth in order that area codes could be used as prefixes. ... --PAT] Col. G. L. Sicherman gls@odyssey.att.COM
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (12/23/90)
The logical solution would be simply to make all calls within the area code local. The price structure is pretty much arbitrary, and they sure could afford it: I don't know of any phone companies losing money... Peter da Silva +1 713 274 5180 peter@ferranti.com
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal L. Schwartz) (12/24/90)
In article <15638@accuvax.nwu.edu>, peter@ficc (peter da silva) writes: | The logical solution would be simply to make all calls within the area | code local. The price structure is pretty much arbitrary, and they | sure could afford it: I don't know of any phone companies losing | money... Making all of Oregon local (Oregon = 1 area code over a *huge* area) is an attractive idea from *my* perspective, but I doubt that you'd ever get the 28 (or so) phone companies within Oregon to agree on a rate that I could afford even on *my* wages. Heck, they're talkin' about bumping my local rate up by $6/month just so that I can call Gresham and Oregon City "for free" (see previous note). And I don't even make $6/month in LD calls to those cities *now*. By the way, when "Moderator Pat" sez Local, and when I say Local, we mean different things. Around here ... local means flat-rate unmeasured service. That's what 90% of the residential customers have around here (baby bell, GTE, independent telcos, all the same kinda rate structure). Not even a per-call charge or per-minute charge, or a tiny local "zone" that makes it a toll call after 7.99 miles. So when you started offering me "local service" to all of Oregon, my ears really perk up. :-) Just another phone user, Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503) 777-0095 on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Beaverton, Oregon, USA, Sol III merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!any-MX-mailer-like-uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn
seanp%undrground@amix.commodore.com (Sean) (12/24/90)
bill@gauss.eedsp.gatech.edu (bill) writes: > Sign me "puzzled", > Bill Berbenich bill@eedsp.gatech.edu > [Moderator's Note: Dear Puzzled -- so am I. I guess what she was > trying to say was that '1' would be required henceforth in order > that area codes could be used as prefixes. I guess ?? Pat - This reporter, believe it or not, is NOT incorrect. About four days ago I received a letter from Bell of Pennsylvania which stated the EXACT same thing, reinforcing the fact that they were eliminating the '1' to gain more numbers. How, I have no idea. I will try to find the letter and will type a copy to everyone. As well, I have an interview set up with a Bell of Pennsylvania official scheduled for after the holidays, and will get the technical scoop then. This one definately requires more investigating! Sean seanp%undrground@amix.commodore.com
toddi@cs.washington.edu (Todd Inch) (01/05/91)
In article <15649@accuvax.nwu.edu> PAT writes that the # button is often the telephone equivalent of a "return key", and: >There is no >reason people couldn't be trained to stick it on the end of all >dialing as a signal they are finished. Then, *any combination* could >be a local number, no? PAT] Sounds good, but this couldn't happen until tone dialing becomes mandatory and networks are no longer compelled to support pulse dialing. Anybody heard when that might happen? I'm amazed that pulse is still around - is support enforced by tariff? (Remember: Do your kids know how to dial a rotary phone for emergencies?) Todd Inch, System Manager, Global Technology, Mukilteo WA (206) 742-9111 UUCP: {smart-host}!gtisqr!toddi ARPA: gtisqr!toddi@beaver.cs.washington.edu
dave@westmark.westmark.com (Dave Levenson) (01/13/91)
In article <15968@accuvax.nwu.edu>, gtisqr!toddi@cs.washington.edu (Todd Inch) writes: > (Remember: Do your kids know how to dial a rotary phone for > emergencies?) My friend's kids once asked why the act of pushing keys on the telephone was called 'dialing'. 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