Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!spool.mu.edu!uunet!bu.edu!telecom-request From: Barton.Bruce@camb.com (Barton F. Bruce) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 800/950 vs 10xxx And 800 vs Call Me Card Message-ID: Date: 4 Mar 91 06:24:16 GMT Sender: news@bu.edu.bu.edu Organization: Cambridge Computer Associates, Inc. Lines: 37 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 181, Message 1 of 9 950 access is over the older feature group B trunks, and it is really silly to perpetuate what was ideally a temporary measure. It means PHYSICALLY different trunks and switching equipment. This is wasted dollars which translates to higher prices. The only valid reason 950 must exist is in the few places that don't yet have equal access. 10xxx access is over the same feature group D trunks that equal access uses and should be ALL that is needed. If the carriers would arrange for a suitable selection of screening codes to be universally available FREE, it would be simple and safe to allow 10xxx0+ type access, as you would KNOW that only "bill elsewhere" traffic would be accepted. You would order the screening service that fits your needs. Between the ones available for hotels and ski condos for weekend rent and assorted others, there is a good start. Perhaps a simple variant would be to ONLY screen if 10xxx is explicitly dialed (even if it selects the default carrier), and this would let a smart switch use the same trunks for all traffic. Any 10xxx0+ traffic would be safe. 0+ from restricted extensions would get 10xxx (of the default carrier) prefixed, and non restricted stations can get 0+ to bill the BTN. The big single group objecting to 10xxx universal access was the lodging industry that has a LOT of older equipment that would be expensive to convert to allow 10xxx codes. Their dumb-dumb mode hardware sees 10xxx as some sort of billable call, and 950 as a vanilla local like call. If one flavor of screening simply disallowed ANYTHING on 10xxx access except 10xxx0+ bill elsewhere traffic, a hotel could allow 10xxx traffic without further understanding it because any attempt to bill to them, even 10xxx1+ would be blocked. Normal 1+ could work optionally, and would be handled by existing call accounting hardware. I have been told that screening is 'honored' by the AT&T/MCI/SPRINT class carriers, but what of telesleeze type ones?