ken@sharkey.cc.umich.edu (Ken Jongsma) (09/06/90)
This week's issue of {Communications Week} as an interesting blurb
entitled "Area Codes Near Exhaustion." In addition to mentioning the
forthcoming 917 code assigned to New York City, they mention that US
West "is studying the possibility of restructuring dialing patterns
so that additional prefixes become available." [in Washington state]
Good grief! Well, let's see. That could mean just about anything now,
couldn't it?
Ken Jongsma ken@wybbs.mi.org
Smiths Industries ken%wybbs@sharkey.umich.edu
Grand Rapids, Michigan ..sharkey.cc.umich.edu!wybbs!ken merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz) (09/06/90)
In article <11746@accuvax.nwu.edu>, wybbs!ken@sharkey (Ken Jongsma) writes: | This week's issue of {Communications Week} as an interesting blurb | entitled "Area Codes Near Exhaustion." In addition to mentioning the | forthcoming 917 code assigned to New York City, they mention that US | West "is studying the possibility of restructuring dialing patterns | so that additional prefixes become available." [in Washington state] | Good grief! Well, let's see. That could mean just about anything now, | couldn't it? Oh, it's probably pretty simple. We use 1+ to indicate long distance around here (assuming our neighbors up north use the same phone calling scheme as we do). It'd probably just be a transition to using 1+ to indicate an area code instead. [small segue now that I have your attention...] But for those of you that have already made that transition, how does that work on toll-restricting phones, like PBXs that block long distance calls? I mean, right now, I know that if I dial 635-nnnn (Lake Oswego) from here, I get an intercept, because it's long distance, so I have to redial 1-635-nnnn to get through. It makes me think twice. I cannot imagine just picking up the phone, and dialing some random unfamiliar seven-digit number, and having to pay long distance charges on it instead just because I didn't know. (My 1- calls are *much* shorter than my free local calls, and I like the added warning that the 1- provides.) Actually, let me guess. Are we one of the last few areas that still has free local calls? (If that sounds weird to you, *not* having free local calls sounds weird to me. :-) Has the rest of the world gone to these "message units" that I keep hearing y'all squawk about? Enough digression. I'm presuming that's what they were talking about... transitioning the 1+ from "long-distance" flag to "area-code" flag, and thus freeing up [2-9][01][0-9] for local exchange codes. Just another local phone caller, 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
John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com> (09/09/90)
Randal Schwartz <merlyn@iwarp.intel.com> writes: > I cannot imagine just picking up the phone, and dialing > some random unfamiliar seven-digit number, and having to pay long > distance charges on it instead just because I didn't know. Since no '1' is dialed here for any long distance, I generally keep my random dialing to a minimum. Not only does it save me money, but saves me time since I only talk to people with whom I wish to converse. Also, I'm told that some (not all, but some) people object to being on the receiving end of "random" calls. > Actually, let me guess. Are we one of the last few areas that still > has free local calls? Unmeasured local calling is at least an option for all California residence subscribers. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz) (09/09/90)
In article <11890@accuvax.nwu.edu>, john@bovine (John Higdon) writes: | Randal Schwartz <merlyn@iwarp.intel.com> writes: | > I cannot imagine just picking up the phone, and dialing | > some random unfamiliar seven-digit number, and having to pay long | > distance charges on it instead just because I didn't know. | Since no '1' is dialed here for any long distance, I generally keep my | random dialing to a minimum. Not only does it save me money, but saves | me time since I only talk to people with whom I wish to converse. | Also, I'm told that some (not all, but some) people object to being on | the receiving end of "random" calls. Random was the wrong word. Maybe it's because I run a business, but I'm eternally calling back some phone number left by a message. "Call Suzie at 635-2233", it says. Now, in the unfriendly system that it's about to become (hopefully not for a while), I have to look up that silly chart that tells if 635 is a local call to 643 (my home prefix), and if not, *keep* the friggin' call short. Right now, I just dial away, and let the phone company figure it out. It is *not* intuitive about what is and isn't a local call around here, by the way. There are parts of the city that are 1/4 the air mileage as the furthest free call, that end up being a toll call because of the mixture of US West, GTE, and random small telco around here. (Real example... local call from East Portland to Forest Grove, about 20 airmiles, but long distance from Beaverton to Lake Oswego, and they're adjacent, but *local* again from Beaverton to Wilsonville, which is on the *other* side of Lake Oswego.) I'd almost always be guessing wrong, unless I had dialed the prefix before. (And new prefixes are showing up every day.) I think this scam of using 1+ to indicate area codes instead of toll calls is actually good for the phone company in two ways ... they can sell more phone numbers (if it wasn't for PBX DID, we wouldn't be running out), and people can get stuck with toll calls without knowing it. A scam. Sorta like forced business measured service, which our PUC has thumbed his nose at a few times around now. (Anything the phone company asks for that is footnoted as "will save the customer money" probably won't, I suspect.) 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
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) (09/11/90)
In article <11912@accuvax.nwu.edu>, merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz) writes: > I think this scam of using 1+ to indicate area codes instead of toll > calls is actually good for the phone company in two ways ... they can > sell more phone numbers (if it wasn't for PBX DID, we wouldn't be > running out), and people can get stuck with toll calls without knowing > it. A scam. First of all, are you sure that the new dialing rules will allow you to dial intra-NPA long distance calls as NXX-XXXX? We've undergone a similar number shortage here in NC, and the new rules require 1-NXX-NXX-XXXX for *all* long distance calls, both intra- and inter-NPA. Eight-digit dialing for intra-NPA LD (1-NNX-XXXX) has been eliminated. Any number that can be dialed with only seven digits is thus guaranteed to be local. Of course, just because all seven-digit numbers are local does not imply that all local calls are seven-digit! Local calling zones straddle an NPA boundary in many parts of the country, and a variety of solutions have been used (seven-digit, ten-digit, eleven-digit). But this has always been a problem and it shouldn't get any worse just because your NPA starts using NXX prefixes. Your characterization of the 1+ dialing rules as a "scam" by your local telco doesn't really hold water anyway -- it's Bellcore that sets the numbering rules and assigns area codes. And the plans for NXX prefixes and area codes are not exactly all that new; they've been part of the North American Numbering Plan for many years now (although the first NXX NPA isn't scheduled to debut for another four or five years). Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation 62 Alexander Drive goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau USA
cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB) (09/13/90)
Don't forget that in New Jersey, intra-NPA toll calls are dialed as only 7D. And 313 area in Michigan, according to this Digest, reduced its intra-NPA toll calls to 7D as well.
merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz) (09/13/90)
In article <12058@accuvax.nwu.edu>, cmoore@brl (VLD/VMB) writes: | Don't forget that in New Jersey, intra-NPA toll calls are dialed as | only 7D. And 313 area in Michigan, according to this Digest, reduced | its intra-NPA toll calls to 7D as well. Eeek. My worst fears coming true! :-) So, how do they program PBXs and COCOTs in those places? Do they maintain a list of valid non-toll exchanges? Must be misery when a new one comes out (for everyone except TPC). 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
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (09/14/90)
In article <12058@accuvax.nwu.edu> you write: >Don't forget that in New Jersey, intra-NPA toll calls are dialed as >only 7D. New Jersey has what one might call "almost strict" NANP dialing. From my parents' house in Princeton (AC 609) a seven digit call might be an intra-LATA local call, an inter-LATA local call, an intra-LATA toll call, or an inter-LATA toll call. The 609 is two separate LATAs. Also, local calls that happen to cross a LATA or area code boundary can still be dialed with seven digits. I expected them to require 11 digits on inter-lata local calls when they introduced the 908 area code, but the current phone book that tells us all about 908 specifically says that local calls across the area code line are seven digits. I suppose that some people might prefer dial 1 for toll, but in the presence of message units, optional extended dialing areas and LD plans such as Reach Out, I don't really know what a toll call is any more. Regards, John Levine, johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!esegue!johnl
john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (09/15/90)
Randal Schwartz <merlyn@iwarp.intel.com> writes: > So, how do they program PBXs and COCOTs in those places? Do they > maintain a list of valid non-toll exchanges? Must be misery when a > new one comes out (for everyone except TPC). A PBX administrator must keep on top of any new prefixes in the NPA to make sure they are programmed for the right route. In this area, one must keep on top of new prefixes in 408 AND 415, since there are prefixes being added in 415 that are local to this part of 408 (and visa versa). I get a quartarly listing of prefixes from PacBell. In the case of COCOTs, as usual, the situation is pot luck. The general rule is that the phone's programming is out of date, and when you try to call someone with a brand new phone number, the phone won't allow it. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !