Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: goldstein@delni.enet.dec.com Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 8-Digit Phone Numbers vs. More Area Codes Message-ID: Date: 14 Nov 89 17:21:46 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Littleton MA USA Lines: 30 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 510, message 3 of 10 In article , peter%ficc@uunet.uu.net (Peter da Silva) writes... >After all the exchanges are on NXX, and after we've used up the NXX >exchanges, then what's the plan? 8- or 9- digit local numbers, or >4-digit exchanges, or partitioning Zone 1, or what? >(Yes, I know this will take a while... maybe another 20 years) Actually, we're almost out of NXX codes. So far unassigned I think I recall it's down to 909, 410, 310, 210, 710, 810 and 910; the latter are formerly TWX. And a couple being recovered from Mexico. The plan is that area codes will next be in the pattern NN0, such as 260, 460, etc. (Those are the first two in the Blue Book recommendation.) Since those can be prefix codes anywhere, the entire NANP area will need to use 1+ dialing to identify that an area code (NOT a toll call) follows. That point in time is called "time T" and is scheduled for something like December, 1995, but I don't recall the exact date. In the interim, some "interchangeable" area codes (i.e., 486, 779) may be assigned to non-local exchange ISDN users. Since they're not used for local calling, they won't be accessible from the POTS net, but will be accessible from ISDN (with its fancier protocol). fred Disclaimer: This information is from my own memory; I attend T1S1 but not T1S1.4 which advises Bellcore on the numbering plan.