Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: Sun, 2 Jun 91 20:14 PDT From: John Higdon Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Surprise!! Reply-To: John Higdon Message-ID: Organization: Green Hills and Cows 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 419, Message 1 of 9 Lines: 31 Brian Gordon writes: > The bad news is that, without notice, the "permissive" 1-plus dialing > has stopped working. This is a programming problem in your individual CO. There would be no reason to block the permissive '1' in calling long distance. A '1' is still permitted (but not required) from my 408 telephones. Bill Woodcock writes: > Yeah, I just can't get enough of that great Pac*Bel logic either. > Does this mean that after the 415/510 split, we'll be getting free > unlimited calls to a _different area code_ if we have flat-rate > service, and are calling back and forth from SF to the East Bay? Does > that happen anywhere else? Frequently. As a matter of fact, Mountain View and Los Altos (415) are Zone 1 (local) to San Jose 2 (408). Southern Fremont (415) is local to San Jose 1 (408). In both cases, the full ten (or eleven in the case of calls from 415) digits must be dialed to complete a LOCAL call. And yes, if you have unmeasured residence service the call is free. This also is the case in many places in the Los Angeles area, and in many other places around the country, as Pat suggests. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !