Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: When People Don't Dial 9 on PBXs
Message-ID: <5288@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 17 Mar 90 15:47:29 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Public Health Research Institute, New York City
Lines: 22
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 180, Message 8 of 9


In <5259@accuvax.nwu.edu> kaplanr@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Robert Kaplan) writes:

> from Brandeis that means dialing 9-647-5522.  Naturally any number of
> people will forget and dial just 6475522, which the system reads as 6475.

	It works the other way too (sounds like deja vu, doesn't it).
Some years ago, we had a data line put in at work (must have been
around 1980 or so; when having a 212A data set meant all sorts of fuss
to install a special line with an RJ-45-somethingorother with an
exclusion key phone, etc).  It was the only phone in the place where
you didn't have to dial 9 to get an outside line.  People often forgot
that, and would dial 9-xxx-yyy-zzzz and get connected to 9xx-xyy-yzzz.
This was before the days of dial 1 for long distance, so the call
would go through to some random long distance number.


Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,philabs,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy
"My karma ran over my dogma"