[TELECOM] Re: 1+10D, was 11X and N11 Codes

John Levine wrote:

Bob Goudeau wrote regarding "straight" 7D home-NPA toll: >> The oddballs were those few places that could dial 7D long distance >> calls, not Texas or the other 40+ states that had more conventional >> dialing plans. > Given the relative populations involved, I think it's fairer to say > that both both plans were widespread. Toll alerting was more common > in rural areas than urban ones, and probably more common in non-Bell > areas since I gather that 1+ for toll was originally due to the > difficulty of making SxS exchanges do anything else. Panel and > xbar, which were more common in Bell areas, were more flexible.

I dunno.... Panel and #1XB was NOT as "widespread" as some think. While SXS was used by ALL rural areas and small towns until #5XB and later ESS came about, SXS was ALSO used in just about every other decently sized city throughout the US, and EVERYWHERE in Canada, until #5XB and later ESS came about.

Panel/#1XB was common ONLY in about 20 metro areas -- mostly in the urban northeast/mid-Atlantic states and urban mid-West -- i.e., located in what is now served by Verizon (Bell Atlantic/NYNEX) and Ameritech, also including the following other metro areas:

St.Louis MO (I don't know about the IL-side)(Southwestern Bell) Kansas City MO and KS (Southwestern Bell), Omaha NE (but NOT Council Bluffs IA) (Northwestern Bell) San Francisco / Oakland CA (Pacific Tel & Tel) Seattle WA (Pacific Tel & Tel, later spun off as Pacific NW Bell)

San Jose CA probably had #1XB, or maybe exclusively #5XB, but never Panel... and does NOT ever seem to have had "1+ means toll". It wasn't until VERY LATE (Probably when NNX-form area code preparations in 1994 for 1995) when "1+ required for ten-digits" became effective!

There was also a small bit of Panel in Southern Bell's Atlanta GA, two switches installed in the late 1920s or early 1930s, with SXS installed for EVERYTHING else after that until #5XB was introduced. The two Panel offices were replaced with #5XB in the late 1950s or early 1960s.

Los Angeles CA Metro (and possibly San Diego CA) was a SXS metro area which had special SAMA and SATT SXS switching, and did NOT require 1+ for toll or at least "ten-digits follows", that is until N0X/N1X-form c.o.codes began to be introduced in their own home NPAs.

Areas which developed as Panel and #1XB, summarized above, USUALLY followed those same rules. However, if there were a lot of SXS offices nearby, especially if there was local calling with the "city", for simplicity and uniformity in dialing instructions, the "1+ for toll" (or the earlier 112+) was used from the Panel/#1XB offices as well. I'm thinking that Seattle WA, Omaha NE, Kansas City MO, and St.Louis MO all probably went to a "1+ for toll" at some point in the 1960s era.

So, even with the urban metro areas of the northeast/mid-Atlantic, midwest, and "urban" California never having "1+ means toll" but rather "1+ means ten-digits follows", and even though these have large populations, I side with Bob Goudreau, in that that VAST majority of the REGIONS of the US (and all of Canada) developed with "1+ means toll", or at least SOME other "toll" prefix. And as for populations, even with the largest urban areas in the US never having "1+ means toll", there still would be a LOT of decently sized/populated cities ALL OVER the US (and Canada) which always "knew" of "1+ means toll" (or 112+ for toll if they had DDD in the earliest days of the 1950s). Again, SXS was REALLY the "norm" for MOST of the Bell System, until #5XB began to be introduced mostly in the 1950/60s, and then ESS in the late 1960s and thorughout the 1970s/80s. SXS served just about EVERYTHING else outside of those 20-some Panel/#1XB areas which were the "biggest" urban areas (NYCity, Chicago, Detroit, Boston, etc).

> 3) As Lisa notes, "protected" exchanges to support 7D local dialing >> across NPA lines got harder to maintain as time went on. > Right. That ended around the time of the first NXX area codes.

No it didn't. "Protected" 7D local calling aross NPA lines (usually at a state/province boundary) is still in effect in numerous areas throught the US and Canada, mostly in rural areas, but even in more populated areas. It is up to state regulatory agencies to require it be discontinued, unless the FCC were to pre-empt all state agencies in mandating its complete and total elimination everywhere in the US.

In Canada, there are still examples of "protected" 7D local calling across province/NPA boundaries. There are some "protected" 7D calling corridors between towns in New Brunswick (NPA 506) and eastern Quebec (NPA 418), which WILL BE CONTINUED even after NPA 418 is overlaid with NPA 581 later this year! I think that those local calls FROM Quebec (418 and 581) TO New Brunswick (506) will be required at ten-digits, since those local calls WITHIN the Quebec-side (418 and 581) will be ten-digit with their "own" overlay. However local calls from NB to eastern Quebec can continue to be dialed as just seven-digits. The CNA (Canadia Numbering Administrator) will have to make certain that there are NO "duplications" or "triplications" of NXX c.o.codes between the 418/581 NPAs in Quebec and 506 New Brunswick, at least not in the LOCAL calling area.

"Code Protection" of c.o.codes apply ONLY to the LOCAL calling area between the two (or more) NPAs/states/provinces, NOT to the "entire" NPAs, though...

On the other hand, w/r/t "code protection" for 7D local calling across NPA/province boundaries in Canada, when c.o.code protection between the Ottawa ON (613) / Hull PQ (819) Metro Area was eliminated in Fall 2006, the Canadian telecom industry decided to make ten-digit local dialing MANDATORY throughout the ENTIRE reigions of BOTH NPAs

613 AND 819! Not "just" for local calls that crossed the NPA/province line, not "just" for the entire metro area "subsets"of both NPAs... but throughout the ENTIRE region of BOTH NPAs! In about another two years, possibly in May 2010, the 613 area code in southeastern Ontario is to be overlaid with the new 343 NPA code. At first, the municipal government of Ottawa ON was pushing for a SPLIT of 613, where the Ontario (Ottawa) side of the Ottawa ON/Hull PQ Metro area would retain the 613 NPA, requiring everyone else throughout the existing 613 NPA region to split-off and change to the new 343 NPA, DESPITE the fact that EVERYONE in the 613 NPA has had MANDATORY ten-digit local dialing since Fall 2006! Recently, consultants to the City Governmen of Ottawa ON have advised them to back-off from the request of a split, and to simply endorse the overlay.

In the US, there are still protected 7D local dialing arrangements across NPA boundaries, usually at a state line, even in larger towns and cities! Lousiville KY and the area of Jeffersonville/New Albany IN across the Ohio River (KY 502, IN 812) still can locally dial each other as JUST 7D. The "Quad Cities" of Illinois (NPA 309) and Iowa (NPA 563, previously part of NPA 319) which straddle the Mississippi River -- Davenport IA & Bettendorf IA (NPA 563, previously 319), and Rock Island IL & Moline IL (NPA 309), can call each other locally, all local calling as JUST seven-digits! There are obviously others, mostly in rural areas, but there are probably others in larger metro areas as well.

I would assume that eventually, as these areas get overlaid -- as long as ONE side/NPA gets overlaid, then local calling within the overlay region AS WELL AS all local calls TO/FROM the overlay region with the adjacent region not yet overlaid, will require ten-digits. The non- overlay region will continue to have local seven-digit intra-NPA dialing until they get overlaid, or until the FCC requires ALL of the USA (or at least the continental USA) implement ten-digit dialing for all local "home" NPA calls.

Canada's CRTC is a bit different as mentioned above with the forthcoming 418/581 eastern Quebec overlay later this year, w/r/t those few local calls with adjacent New Brunswick 506. Whenever NB gets overlaid, or if the CRTC requires mandatory ten-digit local dialing across Canada, then thus oddity (which I think is only going to be one-way) will be eliminated, with ten-digit mandatory dialing in all cases being the standard.

Another oddity w/r/t Canada also involves some local calling arrangements between a US/Canada border communities:

St.Regis PQ is actually in NPA 613 (southeastern Ontario's NPA code) although it was NPA 514 until 15 or 20 years ago. I don't know WHY they were changed from 514 to 613, but they were. (If St.Regis PQ had remained 514 instead, it still would have been changed to the new

450 NPA in 1998 when there was the 514/450 NPA split in southwestern Quebec). Anyhow, St.Regis PQ has local calling with Fort Covington NY, NPA 518 (Verizon/New York Tel). St.Regis PQ could dial with JUST 7D to call Fort Covington NY, until mandatory ten-digit dialing took effect over a year ago. Now they must dial 518+7D, straight ten-digits when calling to Ft.Covington NY. At some point, probably in the 1990s era or maybe the 1980s, NYNEX required local calls from Ft.Covington NY to St.Regis PQ to be 1+ten-digits. Yes a required 1+ although it was still a local call. It might have started with St.Regis was still 514, i.e., 1+514+the local seven-digit number 575-xxxx. But during the 1990s, it was definately 1+613+575-xxxx.

Later this year, the entire province of Alberta (presently 403 for the southern third which includes Calgary; and 780 for the central third including Edmonton-- and northern third), will be overlaid with the new 587 NPA. While ten-digit dialing will become the "norm", there will STILL be some "protected" seven-digit local dialing in a few cases, with special c.o.code assignment procedures!

The town of Lloydminster straddles the Alberta/Saskatchewan province line. Lloydminster is also unique in that it is ONE municipal entity for local government! Yet it straddles a province line. I don't think that any such situation exists in the US -- Kansas City MO and Kansas City KS are TWO SEPERATE local governmental entities; Texarkana TX and Texarkana AR are TWO SEPERATE local governmental entities! (Although there are NUMEROUS cases where a single municipal government entity in the US does straddle two county or county-like boundaries, but within a single state). Anyhow, Lloydminster is split between two area codes and even telephone companies. The Albera side is NPA 780 (once was part of 403), and Telus (formerly AGT) is the local telco. The Saskatchewan side is NPA 306, and Sasktel is the local telco. Local calling exists across the province line, and even extends a bit into each others' provinces outside of the immediate metro areas. Local calling is also just 7D. (BTW, at one time, AGT was the local telco for the Saskatchewan side, and 403 was also the NPA for the SK-side! Dialtone for the SK-side came from a central office switch on the AB-side. This was changed to the current situation, where the SK-side got its own SK-side switch and 306 NPA, provided by Sasktel, but local calling was still maintained as just 7D, only that the AB-side changed from 403 to 780 with the 403/780 split of 1999).

With the overlay of ALL of Alberta, both 403 and 780, with 587 later this year, there will STILL be 7D local calling. I don't remember exactly if it will be in both directions or in only one direction, between both sides of the AB/SK province (and 780/587 AB / 306 SK) line, of the single city government entity of Lloydminster... but SOME form of protected 7D will continue at this point in time.

Also, Coutts AB (403, soon to be "theoretically" overlaid with 587) and Sweetgrass MT (406) are local w/r/t each other, and pesently call each other as 7D in both directions. I THINK that the CRTC is going to require that Coutts go to mandatory ten-digit dialing, even though it is highly unlikely that they will get a 587-NXX code for a LOOONNNNG time to come. However, Coutts also has local calling with other points further in Alberta, and these locations might get 587-NXX codes. It is also likely that Coutts AB will have to go to ten-digit dialing to call Sweetgrass MT USA as 406+seven-digits. However, the CRTC is not going to "require", nor do they even have the jurisdiction to require, that Sweetgrass MT USA calling to Coutts AB (presently as just 7D) be changed to ten-digits as 403+seven-digits. I tend to think that if the FCC becomes aware of this unique situation, that they MIGHT actually require ten-digit dialing northbound across the border... but the CRTC does NOT seem to be notifying the FCC of this unique situation. Of course, the FCC does know that there is local calling, but they probably don't know about how it will interact with the forthcoming Alberta OVERLAY. Maybe they don't even care, since this is a rural area. Of course, if it were between two STATES WITHIN the US, then ten-digit dialing would be mandated even in a rural interstate situation if one or the other side had an overlay. Also, if Montana's

406 is ever overlaid, or if the FCC were to require mandatory ten-d for all local calls in the US, then this Sweetgrass MT to Coutts AB local dialing WOULD become mandatory ten-digits.

BTW, Kansas City KS/MO still maintained 7D local calls across the MO (816) / KS (913) state/NPA boundary for several years after the first 'NNX' area codes of 1995. It was sometime in the LATE 1990s when local calls between the two went mandatory ten-digits. Local calls WITHIN one's own state/NPA are permissive ten-digits, still "parallel" alongside 7D intra-home-NPA/state local dialing.

Finally, permissive 1+ten-digit home-NPA local is NOT universal. There ARE numerous places where 1+ten or stright-ten for home-NPA local WILL NOT WORK. One MUST dial JUST 7D for such calls!

Similarly, where "straight" ten-d is required between NPAs for such local calls, it is still possible for _1+_ before the ten-digits to be rejected! Unfortunately, there is NO simple "rule" to dialing in the NANP, even as we come close to the end of the first decade of the new century/millennium!

Of course, this is in the context of LANDLINE service, from incumbent local telcos. CLECs and VoIP have their own unique dialing options, as does wireless. I store ALL of my NANP numbers in my cellphone as

1+NPA+NXX-xxxx, regardless of where in the NANP they are located. I also try to dial (manually "key") number as 1+ten-digits in all cases although I might sometimes omit the 1+ prefix. I can ALSO store and manually "key" NANP numbers with my cellphone in the full international format: +1NXXNXXxxxx. However, the display/etc. does NOT "parse" between the +1 country code and area code, nor between the area code and office code, nor between the office code and line-number and it makes it difficult to "recognize" the number for later use. While I *CAN* store/key even NANP numbers in the full international format, I don't.

### _________________________________________________________________ Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista=AE + Windows Live=99.

formatting link

Reply to
Mike Z
Loading thread data ...

I cheerfully agree that in vast swaths of unpopulated desert, prairie, and tundra, if you could find a phone, you had to dial 1+. The places with

10D and 7D toll happened to be places where a whole lot of people did and do live, which is why I say that both were common.

I found an interesting spreadsheet that describes the Canadian dial plans linked from

formatting link
You're right, in many rural parts of Canada, they plan to continue 7D dialing into other area codes. Between NB and QC, it'll be 7D NB->QC but

10D QC->NB. Go figure.

NANPA, which I realize is not perfectly definitive, disagrees with you in several cases. It says there's 7D local into other NPAs from 502, but the rest are 10D or 1+10D in the rest of them. Still, I'm amazed there's protected exchanges anywhere in the US.

It's always been a peculiar situation due to the Indian reservation which straddles the border there.

Here in New York, calls are all 7D within the NPA, or 1+10D anywhere, unrelated to local or toll. It's the perfect dialing plan, you know.

R's, John

Reply to
John L

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.