Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: Bob Goudreau Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Uniform International Dialing Message-ID: <8890@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 12 Jun 90 14:11:59 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: goudreau@larrybud.rtp.dg.com (Bob Goudreau) Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC Lines: 51 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 429, Message 2 of 10 In article <8869@accuvax.nwu.edu>, mitel!spock!grayt@uunet.uu.net (Tom Gray) writes: > >>In a perfect world I could dial "+44 81 676 XXXX" to reach my number > >>in London from *anywhere* in the world, including the UK (where + > >>means 010). Similarly it would be nice to be able to dial 011 1 415 > >>XXX XXXX to reach San Francisco from anywhere in the US. > >>I was originally going to post this with lots of ":-)", but seriously > >>though folks, why should it be difficult with modern switches? > The main problem with this proposal would be the size of the data base > required inside of each switch. Think of the routing problems which > would occur when any digit sequence could be used to identify a trunk > route. Each switch would be required to maintain the telephone number > of all of the subscribers in the world. Even small CDO's would require > gigabytes of disk storage. Say what? No one was proposing that arbitrary numbers be allowed for persons in any part of the world. All he was saying is that switches that are smart enough to route direct-dialed international calls should also be smart enough to recognize an "international" call to inside their own country code, and handle this special case appropriately. In the UK, the telco would just translate a "010-44" prefix to a "0" prefix; in the US, "011-1" would become simply "1". However, I think this capability would be of little utility unless the international access code were truly standardized world-wide; otherwise, you still run into the same old problem of having to dial a number differently depending on your current geographical location. Another poster has already mentioned that "00" will eventually be mandated in all of the EC (including, presumably, Britain). Someone else suggested several months ago that there was no technical reason that the NANP couldn't also use "00" (with a timeout to distinguish a call to the long-distance operator from an international call, similar to the current setup for "0", which can either be a call to the local operator or a prefix to an operator-assisted long-distance call). Of course, another alternative is to add a "+" key and tone to everyone's phone world-wide :-). Bob Goudreau +1 919 248 6231 Data General Corporation 62 Alexander Drive goudreau@dg-rtp.dg.com Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 ...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!goudreau USA