Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!hybrid!scifi!bywater!uunet!bu.edu!telecom-request From: !carroll@ssc-vax.uucp (Jeff Carroll) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 1+206 Dialling Coming to Washington Message-ID: Date: 3 Mar 91 00:17:53 GMT Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu Reply-To: Jeff Carroll Organization: Boeing Aerospace & Electronics Lines: 33 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 174, Message 6 of 9 In article hpubvwa!ssc!Tad.Cook writes: > My personal guess is that they will make King and Snohomish counties > 206, and the rest of Western Washington something else, or they will > draw an east-west line somewhere between Seattle and Tacoma, and > divide it there. If they make King and Snohomish 206 and the rest something else, an interesting situation would ensue - namely, there would be two geographical pieces of something-else, and in order to get from one to the other, you would have to drive thru 206 (or take a ferry across the Sound). Remember, King and Snohomish both run east to the current 206/509 boundary (does anyone know for sure whether the two coincide - for example, aren't all the ski resorts at Snoqualmie summit - including the ones in King County - in 509?). The east-west line would IMHO not be the best choice. No matter where you draw the line between Seattle and Tacoma, most future growth would be taking place north of the line. I can think of two other possibilities - one would be to draw a line around Seattle, Tacoma, and possibly Olympia (with the line running down the middle of Lake Washington - leave Mercer Island in with Seattle). This would isolate the bulk of the existing subscriber base from the suburbs, which is where most future growth will occur (like it or not). The other would be to enlarge 509 (how much of its capacity is being used?) Jeff Carroll carroll@ssc-vax.boeing.com