dan@sics.se (Dan Sahlin) (10/28/89)
As I understand it, "011" is used as the international prefix in the US, whereas the international recommendation is "00". Are there some other numbers starting with 00 preventing it to be used as international prefix? In Sweden, we have some numbers starting with 00 (for instance 000 for the operator), so we cannot follow the international standard. Here, no number may be a prefix of another, but in the US the operator is reached by "0" and international calls start with "011". How is that possible? /Dan Sahlin (dan@sics.se)
johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (11/09/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0497m03@vector.dallas.tx.us> "Brandon S. Allbery" <telotech!bsa%hal@uunet.uu.net> writes: >I just saw an AT&T ad in USN&WR that claimed that "00" is international >directory assistance. Actually, 00 is your long-distance company operator. The traditional AT&T way to get international directory assistance is to call the operator, hence dial 00 (or, I suppose, 10288-0). I have also gotten international DA from AT&T's international information center at 800-874-4000. In the past, if you got international DA through the operator, they'd charge you for the call unless you called the number you got afterwards. The one time I got DA from the 800 number, they asked me for the number I was calling from but didn't charge me. Anybody know how they charge now? John R. Levine, Segue Software, POB 349, Cambridge MA 02238, +1 617 864 9650 johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {ima|lotus|spdcc}!esegue!johnl Massachusetts has over 100,000 unlicensed drivers. -The Globe
la063249@zach.fit.edu (Bill Huttig) (11/09/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0497m02@vector.dallas.tx.us> rmadison@euler.berkeley. edu (Linc Madison) writes: >Oy! I found that surprising, since in Australia the digit to dial for >calls outside a Centrex or similar system is "0" instead of "9" in >U.S. Thus, a call to the U.S. from an Australian Centrex is >0-0011-1-etc. To then have "000" as emergency seems it could have >high potential for misdials. "Emergency? No, I'm trying to reach >France!" Reminds me of when I was in Tallahasees (81-84) Centel had the Time & Temperature number of 118. I moved off campus for a semester and naturally I picked up the phone and dialed 9-118 since I was use to dialing 9 for off campus, and I got 911. Bill
michael@uunet.uu.net (Michael Katzmann) (11/10/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0497m02@vector.dallas.tx.us> rmadison@euler.berkeley. edu (Linc Madison) writes: >>For starters, Australia uses 000 as the emergency number (like 911 in >>USA and 999 in GB). ^^^ >>Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU), Alcatel STC Australia, dave@stcns3.stc.oz.AU >Oy! I found that surprising, since in Australia the digit to dial for >calls outside a Centrex or similar system is "0" instead of "9" in >U.S. Thus, a call to the U.S. from an Australian Centrex is >0-0011-1-etc. To then have "000" as emergency seems it could have >high potential for misdials. "Emergency? No, I'm trying to reach >France!" The PABX at the place where I worked in Australia had 555 as the emergency number (it translated it to 000 for the outside line). It was also barred for trunk and overseas calls (at least from my phone), so dialling 0-0011 etc would just give you an engaged tone! Having different numbers for emergency is annoying! When I was in London one time, I wanted directory assistance, so I looked (not to carefully) and came up with 999. The operator became quite irrate when I told here that there was no fire. I then found the correct directory assistance number and called it. To my amazment the person who answered said "Were you the person who just called 999 ??"!!! I then received five minutes more of abuse and lecture!
dave@uunet.uu.net (Dave Horsfall) (11/22/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0497m02@vector.dallas.tx.us>, rmadison@euler.berkeley.edu (Linc Madison) writes: | Oy! I found that surprising, since in Australia the digit to dial for | calls outside a Centrex or similar system is "0" instead of "9" in | U.S. Thus, a call to the U.S. from an Australian Centrex is | 0-0011-1-etc. To then have "000" as emergency seems it could have | high potential for misdials. "Emergency? No, I'm trying to reach | France!" Doesn't seem to be that much of a problem. The mis-dial would only occur if you were dialing from home, or from a direct line in an office. You would be alerted by the fact that there was no secondary dial-tone after the first "0". In many PABX's, you must wait for this (outside) dial tone - they don't buffer the digit string. Besides, ISD calls are usually only available to the elite few :-) By the way, "9" seems to be pretty universally used (in Australia) to get the switchboard operator on a PABX. Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU), Alcatel STC Australia, dave@stcns3.stc.oz.AU dave%stcns3.stc.oz.AU@uunet.UU.NET, ...munnari!stcns3.stc.oz.AU!dave
dan@sics.se (Dan Sahlin) (11/27/89)
This is a summary and some conclusions to answers to my question: "Why Not 00 as the International Prefix in the US?" John R. Levine came with the only relevant answer: > Actually, 00 is your long-distance company operator. The traditional AT&T > way to get international directory assistance is to call the operator, > hence dial 00 (or, I suppose, 10288-0). As no other numbers start with 00, it would be very simple in the US to start using it as the international prefix. Just like for numbers starting with 0, a timeout could be used to distinguish between calls to the long-distance company operator and the international prefix. Thus the US could then follow the international recommendations for international prefix (i.e. 00), instead of having 010 which is not used anywhere else in the world. I am dreaming the day when I can pick up a telephone anywhere in the world and dial home, always using the same number. Now many people avoid international calls because of all irregularities. I think the international traffic would increase, making all changes in the network quite worthwhile for the telephone companies. Dan Sahlin, dan@sics.se Sweden
piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum) (11/29/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0533m01@chinacat.lonestar.org>, dan@sics (Dan Sahlin) writes: `This is a summary and some conclusions to answers to my question: `"Why Not 00 as the International Prefix in the US?" `As no other numbers start with 00, it would be very simple in the US to `start using it as the international prefix. `instead of having 010 which is not used anywhere else in the world. The UK also has 010. Piet* van Oostrum, Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, P.O. Box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands. Telephone: +31-30-531806 Uucp: uunet!mcsun!hp4nl!ruuinf!piet Telefax: +31-30-513791 Internet: piet@cs.ruu.nl (*`Pete')
john@jetson.upma.md.us (John Owens) (11/29/89)
On Nov 26, 4:25pm, Dan Sahlin wrote: > Thus the US could then follow the > international recommendations for international prefix (i.e. 00), > instead of having 010 which is not used anywhere else in the world. We would still need a way of distinguishing between calls billed to the calling number and operator-assisted or calling-card billing. We dial 011+country+city+number for a direct-billed station-to-station call, and 010+country+city+number to get person-to-person calls and credit-card, collect, or third-party billing. (I've seen 01 used in place of 010, but I believe that both are accepted.) I suppose we could use 00 for direct calls (which seems to be the international standard) and 000 for operator-assisted calls, but given the use of 00 for an LD operator (which is obscure enough alone that few people understand it), this seems like it would confuse things even further. John Owens john@jetson.UPMA.MD.US uunet!jetson!john +1 301 249 6000 john%jetson.uucp@uunet.uu.net
Bob Goudreau <goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com> (12/02/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0533m01@chinacat.lonestar.org> dan@sics.se (Dan Sahlin) writes: >This is a summary and some conclusions to answers to my question: >"Why Not 00 as the International Prefix in the US?" >John R. Levine came with the only relevant answer: >> Actually, 00 is your long-distance company operator. The traditional AT&T >> way to get international directory assistance is to call the operator, >> hence dial 00 (or, I suppose, 10288-0). >As no other numbers start with 00, it would be very simple in the US to >start using it as the international prefix. >Just like for numbers starting with 0, a timeout could be used to >distinguish between calls to the long-distance company operator and >the international prefix. Thus the US could then follow the >international recommendations for international prefix (i.e. 00), >instead of having 010 which is not used anywhere else in the world. Actually, 010 is the international prefix in the UK, not the US. Here in the North American Numbering Plan, we use 011. And is it actually true that someone (presumably CCITT) officially *recommends* using 00 as the prefix? >I am dreaming the day when I can pick up a telephone anywhere in the >world and dial home, always using the same number. Now many people >avoid international calls because of all irregularities. I think the >international traffic would increase, making all changes in the >network quite worthwhile for the telephone companies. > Dan Sahlin, dan@sics.se > Sweden As someone has already pointed out, there are a lot more people and phones here in the NANP (US, Canada, much of the Caribbean) using 011 as the prefix than there are in Europe using 00 as the prefix. If such a change is really needed (and I don't agree that it is), it sounds like *you* should change to conform to the majority, not us. (And no, I'm not advocating such a change, I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the rationale.) Americans are often accused of being rude and provincial, of lacking respect for the peoples of other countries simply because those others do things in different (read "wrong") ways. But lately, I've observed the opposite phenomenon in this forum: the bashing of things American just *because* they're American. That kind of behavior is just as bad as "ugly American" behavior. Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau 62 Alexander Drive goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) (12/02/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0533m01@chinacat.lonestar.org> dan@sics.se (Dan Sahlin) writes: >This is a summary and some conclusions to answers to my question: >"Why Not 00 as the International Prefix in the US?" >John R. Levine came with the only relevant answer: >> Actually, 00 is your long-distance company operator. The traditional AT&T >> way to get international directory assistance is to call the operator, >> hence dial 00 (or, I suppose, 10288-0). >As no other numbers start with 00, it would be very simple in the US to >start using it as the international prefix. >Just like for numbers starting with 0, a timeout could be used to >distinguish between calls to the long-distance company operator and >the international prefix. Thus the US could then follow the >international recommendations for international prefix (i.e. 00), >instead of having 010 which is not used anywhere else in the world. Actually, 010 is the international prefix in the UK, not the US. Here in the North American Numbering Plan, we use 011. And is it actually true that someone (presumably CCITT) officially *recommends* using 00 as the prefix? >I am dreaming the day when I can pick up a telephone anywhere in the >world and dial home, always using the same number. Now many people >avoid international calls because of all irregularities. I think the >international traffic would increase, making all changes in the >network quite worthwhile for the telephone companies. > Dan Sahlin, dan@sics.se > Sweden As someone has already pointed out, there are a lot more people and phones here in the NANP (US, Canada, much of the Caribbean) using 011 as the prefix than there are in Europe using 00 as the prefix. If such a change is really needed (and I don't agree that it is), it sounds like *you* should change to conform to the majority, not us. (And no, I'm not advocating such a change, I'm merely pointing out the absurdity of the rationale.) Americans are often accused of being rude and provincial, of lacking respect for the peoples of other countries simply because those others do things in different (read "wrong") ways. But lately, I've observed the opposite phenomenon in this forum: the bashing of things American just *because* they're American. That kind of behavior is just as bad as "ugly American" behavior. Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau 62 Alexander Drive goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA
john@design.axis.fr (John H.) (12/06/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0533m01@chinacat.lonestar.org>, dan@sics.se (Dan Sahlin) writes: > Thus the US could then follow the > international recommendations for international prefix (i.e. 00), > instead of having 010 which is not used anywhere else in the world. Well, in fact the UK uses 010, I think (please don't shoot me if I'm wrong) the US uses 011. > I am dreaming the day when I can pick up a telephone anywhere in the > world and dial home, always using the same number. Haha! If you think 010 or 011 is funny, try coming to France, we have to do 19 AND WAIT FOR A SECOND DIAL TONE! Primitive! John Hughes
Ge' Weijers <ge@sci.kun.nl> (12/07/89)
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) writes: >As someone has already pointed out, there are a lot more people and >phones here in the NANP (US, Canada, much of the Caribbean) using 011 >as the prefix than there are in Europe using 00 as the prefix. If >such a change is really needed (and I don't agree that it is), it >sounds like *you* should change to conform to the majority, not us. >(And no, I'm not advocating such a change, I'm merely pointing out the >absurdity of the rationale.) There are a lot of places using 00. A short list: Algeria, Argentina, Aruba, Brazil, Brunei, Chili, Peoples Republic of China, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Federal Republic of Germany, Ecuador, Egypt, Philipines Gabon, Gibraltar, Greece, Guatemala, Hungaria, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jordania, Cameroon, Kuwayt, Libya, Luxemburg (nice country, no area codes!), Malaysia, Morocco, Dutch Antilles, Nepal, New Zealand, North Yemen, Oman, Austria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal (Porto 07) Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Togo, Czechoslovakia, Tunesia, Venezuela, United Arab Emirates, Zambia, Switzerland. I've translated this out of a list provided by the Dutch PTT, which explains the order and odd spelling of some names (I'm not going to look them all up in the Webster on my desk.) To make my point: this makes for a lot of telephones. So why make all those people convert to 010. Incidentally 010 is the area code for Rotterdam in the Netherlands. The Dutch system uses 00x for special services like operator assistance, the time, the weather and the likes. They are moving these services to 06xxxxxx numbers though. Maybe we are converting from 09 to 00 for international access. Does anyone know? (maybe someone from DNL cares to comment?) In the meantime use a good agenda. Ge' Weijers Internet/UUCP: ge@cs.kun.nl Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, (uunet.uu.net!cs.kun.nl!ge) University of Nijmegen, Toernooiveld 1 6525 ED Nijmegen, the Netherlands tel. +3180612483 (UTC-2)
dan@sics.se (Dan Sahlin) (12/08/89)
John Hughes wrote: >Haha! If you think 010 or 011 is funny, try coming to France, we have >to do 19 AND WAIT FOR A SECOND DIAL TONE! Primitive! Within a couple of years, when the whole of France uses 8-digit numbers, 00 will be introduced as the prefix for international dialing. Sweden will do the same in the mid-nineties. We now use 009, and the tone comes after the country number! /Dan Sahlin
goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) (12/16/89)
In article <1904@accuvax.nwu.edu> ge@sci.kun.nl (Ge' Weijers) writes: >>As someone has already pointed out, there are a lot more people and >>phones here in the NANP (US, Canada, much of the Caribbean) using 011 >>as the prefix than there are in Europe using 00 as the prefix. If >>such a change is really needed (and I don't agree that it is), it >>sounds like *you* should change to conform to the majority, not us. >>(And no, I'm not advocating such a change, I'm merely pointing out the >>absurdity of the rationale.) >There are a lot of places using 00. A short list: [omitted] >To make my point: this makes for a lot of telephones. So why make all >those people convert to 010. If you had even bothered to read my message, you would have noticed a few of *my* points: 1) I'm *not* advocating that "00" countries change to "011". I was merely pointing out that telephony does not begin and end in Europe. (In fact, the inventor of the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell, was a *Canadian* immigrant to the *US*, so how's that for NANP credentials!) 2) 300 million people in the (mostly prosperous) NANP makes for a *lot* of telephones. How many phones are in use in the "00" countries you cited? Remember, except for the Western European ones, most of those on the list are third world countries and usually have comparatively very few phones. 3) For the second time, it's "011", not "010", that's used as the usual international access code in the NANP. The United Kingdom uses "010" -- add another 50-60 million people to your non-00 hit list. >The Dutch system uses 00x for special >services like operator assistance, the time, the weather and the >likes. They are moving these services to 06xxxxxx numbers though. >Maybe we are converting from 09 to 00 for international access. Does >anyone know? (maybe someone from DNL cares to comment?) In the >meantime use a good agenda. I'm not sure what is meant by the last sentence; please elaborate. >6525 ED Nijmegen, the Netherlands tel. +3180612483 (UTC-2) Does the Dutch PTT also advocate running all of a number's digits together without using any intervening whitespace or punctuation to make it easier for people to read? This practice is not exactly what I'd call good human-factors engineering. Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau 62 Alexander Drive goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA