Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wugate!wuarchive!swbatl!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: blake@astro.as.utexas.edu (R. Blake Farenthold) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: 10xxx codes revisited Message-ID: Date: 21 Jul 89 21:01:06 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Lines: 51 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 250, message 1 of 10 | [Moderator's Note: Baloney, baloney, baloney! Prefixing a call with | 10288 does nothing except force the call to be routed via AT&T. | It does not incur extra charges other than whatever slight | difference there is between AT&T rates to the point in question | and whatever other carrier was being used. If you dial an intra- | lata call (a call within your own town, for example) using 10288 | as the leading code, it is likely the call will be rejected and | you will have to dial over again. I've tried this, and at least | here in Chicago, dialing 10288 followed by a seven digit (or ten digit, | but within IBT's lata) number and a recording says the call cannot be | completed as dialed. Whether or not you get 'cleaner' lines by | forcing your call over AT&T is a very subjective matter. But in | and of itself, 10288 is a way of routing long distance calls -- | not a special feature to insure clean lines at an added cost. PT] Wrong, Wrong, Wrong. Just tried an experiment.. from one of my 12 lines, at home, 512/829-1028, I dialed pro-party, my bbs at 512/829-1027 with the followwing variations: AT&T 10288-829-1027 (connect) MCI 10222-829-1027 (connect) Sprint 10333-829-1027 (connect) Westel 10085-829-1027 (connect) National 10737-829-1027 (connect) All of the above 10XXX-1-829-1027 (It is not necessary to dial a 1 recording) All of the above 10XXX-512-829-1027 (It is not necessary to dial the areacode first. On long distance calls dial 1 or zero first.) Westel 950-0085pp829-1027ppPIN (connect) Westel 950-0085pp512-829-1027ppPin (connect) Also, Inter-Lata Calls (San Antonio -> New Braunfels) can be completed using 10xxx codes (and are billed at a lower rate than SW Bell inter- lata long distance calls.. though its still cheaper for me to go into my car and call New Braunfels because its a local call from my cellular and the LD charges are more than the cellular airtime). SW Bell is aware of the inter-lata problem.. I saw one of their public notice ads in the paper saying that though you wern't supposed to be able to do it you could and that they were petitioning the PUC to allow them to block inter-lata 10xxx dialing. I do not know if they are aware of the 10xxx-local number situation.. it sounds like a bug in their switch. It does raise some interesting questions about pay phone calls. My average local payphone call is less than 5 minutes, so at $.053/minute short 10xxx calls would be cheeper than a $.25 coin call. (Dosn't MCI offer a local call from payphone program using their calling card?).