Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: David Tamkin <0004261818@mcimail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: My List of North American Area Codes
Message-ID: <8485@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 31 May 90 18:05:00 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 29
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 402, Message 4 of 14


Doug Reuben wrote in volume 10, issue 400:

|Additionally, when we go to full 1+ dialing, where (almost) any three
|digits can be an area code, won't 1+xxx-xxxx dialing have to go away?
|I'd personally prefer, if it becomes necessary, to get rid of in-area
|code 1+ dialing over having to wait for a call to timeout ...

Eight-digit dialing will have to vanish.  Toll calls within one's own
area code will be dialed NXX-XXXX or 1-NPA-NXX-XXXX, depending on
whichever your telco picks.  (A few telcos do or will allow both.)

|Of course this is ALREADY a problem with 0+xxx-xxxx calls, but that can
|wait till another time!

In area codes where N[0/1]X prefixes are in use, 0+ calling within the
area code already needs all eleven digits.  That will be the case
throughout North America when NNX area codes go live.

On the topic of Michael Shiels's original submission with this
subject, I thought for sure Patrick would be bombarded with follow-ups
pointing out that area code 917 is not unassigned as Michael wrote but
rather reserved for the next split of area code 212.  But it's been
three or four days now and no one else has said it.


David Tamkin  P. O. Box 7002  Des Plaines IL  60018-7002  +1 708 518 6769
MCI Mail: 426-1818   CIS: 73720,1570   GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN  +1 312 693 0591