Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!decwrl!hayes.ims.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: NNX Shortage in Maryland
Message-ID: <14231@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 1 Nov 90 16:20:35 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 17
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 781, Message 3 of 8


I went to the library at Elkton, Maryland, and looked through call
guides for other parts of Maryland.  When I was done, I listed only 17
unused NNX prefixes in Maryland (area 301 for entire state), and these
include 950 (carrier access) and 958 (phone-co. usage?).  As a result,
I saw N0X/N1X prefixes appearing in Maryland further away from DC than
I have ever seen before: 606 in Frederick, 416 in Myersville (near
Frederick), and 208 in Berlin on the lower eastern shore.  These have
no local service outside of Maryland.

But I see that the next exchange north of Berlin, which is at the
junction of U.S. 113 and U.S. 50, is 301-352 Bishopville, which is
local to Selbyville, Delaware.  There would be a problem (right?) in
putting N0X/N1X prefix in an exchange which is just a 7-digit local
call away from an out-of-area exchange (exception in Maryland for the
DC area suburbs, which now require NPA+7D for out-of-area local call
anyway).