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

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

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.

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.