Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wugate!wuarchive!swbatl!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: klb@lzaz.att.com (K.BLATTER) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 555-XXXX As A Valid Prefix Anywhere? Message-ID: Date: 28 Jul 89 20:18:01 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: AT&T ISL Lincroft NJ USA Lines: 28 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 263, message 6 of 8 In article , msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) writes: > Lisa Smith (lisa@mips.com) wrote the following in an article in > (the Usenet newsgroup) rec.humor.d: > > > That prefix, 555, isn't fictional everywhere. One of my school friends > > said that his grandfather's phone number, somewhere in South Dakota, is > > a 555 number. He said that it was to his knowledge the only place in > > the U.S. that it was a real prefix though. > > Someone else said that if this was ever true it isn't now. > What do the experts say? I don't know if I would qualify myself as an expert, but I have a listing of every prefix in the North American Dialing Area and there is no exchange which uses 555 as a prefix. (Some parts of the listing are a couple of years old, so I guess that it's not really complete. Other parts, however, are very much up to date.) Kevin L. Blatter AT&T - Bell Labs Disclaimer - This information has absolutely nothing to do with my position with AT&T. [Moderator's Note: On a hunch, after the first message on this topic appeared, I tried dialing 701-555-various in North Dakota. Most combinations other than '1212' were answered 'Northwestern Bell, may I help you?' PT]