Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!netsys!vector!telecom-gateway From: FLINTON@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Fred E.J. Linton) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: AT&T Mail announces X.400 interconnections Message-ID: Date: 9 Jun 89 15:18:07 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Lines: 23 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 193, message 10 of 10 You point out, quite correctly, some problems with zip and area codes in the AT&T Mail X.400 connection data I recently forwarded to TELECOM: >>I am also notifying telecom-request in case the archives need to be corrected >>You mentioned Lincroft, NJ in 2 places in your message. The 2nd occurrence >>had zipcode 08838, which should be 07738. >>And where is the phone number shown here: >> MHS Gateway: mhs!dialcom >> Administrator: Mr Laraman >> Dialcom >> South Plainfield, NJ 07080 >> Phone: +1 441 493 3843 What I forwarded to TELECOM came straight out of the ATT-Mail "shared file" !atthelp:news.5 and the ATT-Mail lookup facility DIR[ectory] -- that 441 area code is so obviously wrong that I called ATT-Mail's Customer Assistance folks several times to get it straight (at 1 800 624 5672, voice line), but no one I spoke with could help. Sorry about that. The zip code disparity you observed and corrected I never noticed at all -- mea culpa; and thanks. -- Fred