Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!apple!bionet!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: DREUBEN@eagle.wesleyan.edu) (DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 415/408 0+ Dialing Message-ID: <10112@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 25 Jul 90 14:52:29 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 23 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 515, Message 11 of 12 (Reply is to note by DOUGLAS SCOTT REUBEN written to Carl Moore ) You are saying some phones in 408 require you to use 0+NPA+7D if the call is wihin 408 area? And some phones in 408 will not accept this particular usage of 0+NPA+7D? 408 area does not have N0X/N1X prefixes that I know of, and I am not aware of its calling instructions being changed to match those of 415 for "area-wide uniformity". (This could also be a VERY early accounting for the coming of NXX area codes.) All the areas which I know have N0X/1X prefixes have, with the past(?) exception of 213 in Los Angeles, required 0+NPA+7D for 0+ calls within one's own area. (213's instructions were to use 0+7D within that area.) 213 was the first area to get N0X/N1X prefixes, in July 1973; the 2nd such area, 212 in New York City in late 1980, had its 0+ instructions changed at that time to 0+212+7D for calls within NYC (this was before 212/718 split). It was written in this digest that some NYC equipment could not handle 0+7D with timeout. When 201 area in northern NJ got N0X/N1X prefixes, both 201 and 609 areas (for statewide uniformity, I am told), changed their calling instructions; 0+7D within own area became 0+NPA+7D.