cjg@stl.stc.co.uk (Christopher Gosnell) (08/14/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0256m02@vector.dallas.tx.us> Henry Mensch writes: >X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 256, message 2 of 5 > >>PS. Isn't it about time that the world would agree on the international >>access code, i.e. the code that you replace the +-sign with in your >>international telephone number? In Sweden (and Denmark) we dial 009, >>but many in many countries in Europe it is the more logical 00. > >Why is 00 more logical than 009 (or 011 in Canada and the US), or 0011 >(in Australia)? > These are the access codes for international direct dial that I know of: Algeria 00 Austria 00 Belgium 00 Cyprus (Rep) 00 Czechoslovakia 00 (from Prague; elsewhere dial Prague followed by 00) Denmark 009 Finland 990 France 19 Germany (West) 00 Gibralter 00 Greece 00 Hungary 00 Italy 00 Luxembourg 00 Malta 0 Morocco 00 Netherlands 09 Norway 095 Portugal 00 (07 in some areas) South Africa 09 Spain 07 Sweden 009 Switzerland 00 Tunisia 00 Turkey 99 United Kingdom 010 United States 011 Yugoslavia 99 00, whether more logical or not is certainly the most widespread, at least in Europe and the Med. -- Regards Chris Gosnell ( cjg@stl.stc.co.uk +44-279-29531 Ext 2629 )
dan@sics.se (Dan Sahlin) (08/18/89)
Sweden will before the year 2000 change the international direct dial code from 009 to 00. So will probably most other countries in Europe, thereby following international recommendations. Sweden will also prepare to use the 11x number for emergency calls etc. We now use 90000 for emergency call. This also follows international recommendations. This change may take much longer time as it effects houndreds of thousands of subscribers whose numbers start with 1. /Dan Sahlin, email: dan@sics.se
mike@whutt.att.com (Michael Scott Baldwin) (08/20/89)
* Why is 00 more logical than 009 (or 011 in Canada and the US), or 0011 * (in Australia)? > 00, whether more logical or not is certainly the most widespread, at > least in Europe and the Med. It's because 00 is recommended by CCITT as the international prefix. | When dialing into a country from outside, the leading zero must be | stripped off the area code. Strictly speaking, that 0 isn't part of the area code (called `trunk code' by CCITT); it's the trunk prefix code. Again, CCITT recommends using 0. Some confusion might be caused by the CCITT national number format, which is (trunk code) subscriber number or (trunk prefix + code) subscriber number In the USA, we never put the trunk prefix in the parens, but other countries often do; thus, (020) 22 88 28 in Amsterdam is really trunk code 20. The trunk prefix is never dialed in international dialing. The E.100 series of CCITT recommendations talks about this stuff. -- michael.scott.baldwin@att.com (bell laboratories)
cdh@uunet.uu.net (Chris Hayward) (08/21/89)
The UK code for international direct dialling (IDD) is 010, as opposed to 00 as adopted by many European countries. The reason for this, I believe, is as follows: In the days before IDD, <00> was used as a "special" STD code for calls from the UK (including Northern Ireland) to the Republic of Ireland. When IDD came along, it would have been politically insensitive (suicidal?) to make Eire calls "international", and rather than mess about changing existing codes and routings, the 010 had to be adopted for the IDD prefix. Is this history correct? I wouldn't be surprised if the cause of a common European IDD prefix is yet another victim of the mess that is Anglo-Irish politics :-( Chris Hayward Praxis Systems Bath (UK, I suppose I should say)
ch%maths.tcd.ie@cunyvm.cuny.edu (Charles Bryant) (08/26/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0317m03@vector.dallas.tx.us> praxis!cdh@uunet.uu.net (Chris Hayward) writes: >The UK code for international direct dialling (IDD) is 010, as opposed to >00 as adopted by many European countries. The reason for this, I believe, is >as follows: >In the days before IDD, <00> was used as a "special" STD code for calls from > the UK (including Northern Ireland) to the Republic of Ireland. That is still the case. For example, the Dublin number (01) 234567 is dialled as 0001 234567 from the U.K. However this is not the case for all area codes. The Irish phone book has a table which translates an Irish area code into a code that is dialled from Northern Ireland (it dosen't mention the rest of the U.K. but I have experience with 01 -> 0001 so I assume its the same). Most are really strange. e.g. 01 0001 021 0002 022 010 353 22 (note 353 is international code for Ireland) 041 0011 042 0004 071 0015 078 0010 To dial a U.K. number from Ireland it is much simpler, e.g. the London number 01-234 5678 is dialled as 031 234 5678. The rule is that the U.K. area code is prefixed with 03 except when it is is 0N (n=1,2,3,4,5,6) in which case it becomes 03N. The cellular access codes are given as Cellnet=030860, Vodaphone=030836 (I assume they already include the 03). -- Charles Bryant. (ch@dce.ie) Working at Datacode Electronics Ltd. (Modem manufacturers)