Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: buita!rdr@killer.dallas.tx.us (Dean Riddlebarger) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: telephone carriers Message-ID: Date: 16 May 89 14:08:03 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas Lines: 19 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 168, message 3 of 8 In article , cmoore@brl.mil (VLD/VMB) writes: > 1. Are codes like 10222 and 10288 supposed to work from residence and > business phones as well as pay ones? > > 2. I just passed through the Lynchburg, Va. area, and used a pay phone > (ostensibly C&P) to place a 0+ call inter-LATA, and it went via ITI. > (I guess that means: ugh.) At a relative's home in Indianapolis 10288 works just fine [yep, I'm trying to make a conversion....:-) :-)]. I would assume that nearly all BOC locations can handle this now from residential locations, but some of the smaller independents may still be a bit behind the times. Dean Riddlebarger Systems Consultant - AT&T [216] 348-6863 reasonable path: att!crfax!crnsnwbt!rdr