Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: Mon, 8 Apr 91 12:44:33 BST From: John Slater Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Dublin Number Expansion Message-ID: Organization: TELECOM Digest Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu 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 276, Message 3 of 10 Lines: 29 In article Charles Bryant writes: > It makes me wonder why British Telecom split London from 01 into 071 > and 081. Why not just add a digit? And if eight digit numbers are too > long, why not split into 017 and 018 leaving more room for expansion. > Or even split 01 DXX XXXX into ten areas 01D DXX XXXX removing the > need for the tables to convert old number to new area. And why didn't they split it several dozen other ways too? My favourite would have been north and south of the river, which would make it a lot easier to find the new number as most people know which side of the river a given address is on, from the postcode. Still, they did it and that's an end to it. Except that it isn't: there are medium-term plans to add an extra digit to every phone number in the country, and longer-term plans to rehash the entire system, with lifetime phone numbers (see an earlier thread) and other wondrous things, no doubt. I believe the reason BT didn't choose the "017 & 018" option is that they preferred to keep the entire "01..." sequence clear for as yet unspecified future use. This might well include implementation of some of the schemes mentioned above, I speculate. John Slater Sun Microsystems UK, Gatwick Office My email address is John.Slater@UK.Sun.COM, despite what it might say above.