1. Home
  2. General Telecommunications Forum
  3. Re: Number length, was Goodbye to copper? [Telecom]

Re: Number length, was Goodbye to copper? [Telecom]

> >Remember 1999, every switch needed a software update, it went with > >very little trouble. > > My employer at the time had a Rolm PBX and had a nightmare getting the > update done properly. For over a year, folks at one office were having > to call the operator to place calls to the new area codes.

Scott, I think you are conflating two different things. Steven appears to be referring to Y2K problems, which would have needed to be patched by the end of 1999. It sounds like you are thinking of the upgrades needed to handle NNX area codes, which first made their appearance all the way back in 1995. By the time the start of 1999 rolled around, over one hundred of those new-style area codes had debuted, so I hope your PBX was able to dial them well before that point!

Bob Goudreau Cary, NC

Reply to
Bob Goudreau
Loading thread data ...

It wasn't until late 1996 before they actually got the PBX set up to dial the new area codes, I believe.

The Y2K stuff was pretty trivial in comparison.

--scott

Reply to
Scott Dorsey

New exchanges and area codes were coming out so fast in that era that PBX maintainers were unable to update the tables fast enough. Many new subscribers, upon learning their new phone number looked like an area code, protested and asked for a more conventional number.

Reply to
hancock4

I wonder if protesting or complaining today would have any effect? :-)

I'm reminded of the time (late 1990s) when we (SF Bay Area) lost what I believe was termed "permissive dialing" to cellphones.

My carrier since 1992, Cellular One (now AT&T Mobility), was based in South San Francisco (SSF), and my cellphone number was identical to my landline number but with a different exchange. That was very convenient and all calls to my cellphone were toll-free from anywhere in the SF Bay Area.

With the loss of "permissive dialing" (probably a PUC decision, I don't recall all the facts), I began receiving complaints from clients and friends regarding the toll-charges they were now paying to call me.

After explaining this problem to Cellular One, they assigned me to a new prefix whose "billing location" was Redwood City, about 15+ miles south of SSF. But toll-charge complaints from clients and friends continued.

One more discussion with Cellular One resulted in a new cellphone number whose "billing location" was Mountain View, toll-free for almost all clients and friends, and extremely easy to remember: the three exchange digits are also the first three digits of the remaining 4 digits of the number. And now, for 10+ years, no more complaints from clients and friends. :-)

And for those scratching their head about "billing location", I mean the cellphone-equivalent location of a CO for toll-charge determination.

Reply to
Thad Floryan

Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.