NANPA N11 code expansion [telecom]

It's disappointing that the report does not seem to

> include a list of the NPAs which would need to convert > to mandatory 10D in order to bring this plan to > fruition. Given that absence, I am skeptical that the > cost figures mentioned in the report are accurate. I > am also completely underwhelmed by the arguments > made against the alternatives of using an N11 code > (such as 211) instead of 988.

All N11 codes are already in use. See NANPA:

formatting link

However it certainly would have been possible to expand the 211 series; e.g, 2110, 2111, 2112, 2113...

Neal McLain Brazoria, Texas

Reply to
Neal McLain
Loading thread data ... 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.