[VoIP] Numbering - existing use of 311

[Steph Kerman]

Areas that used 10D dialing before NXX office codes were introduced were 
served by Panel, Crossbar or ESS.  These did indeed adopt the use of 1+ 
to enable the CO to know whether to wait for 7 or 10 digits.  However 
1+10D dialing was always required in most areas served by SXS equipment 
to immediately pass the call through to the toll office when a 10 digit 
call was dialed.  So it is not correct that when all NPAs were N0/1X all 
calls were dialed as 7D or 10D. 

Many SXS areas, in addition to requiring 1+10D dilaing also required 
1+7D dialing for short haul toll, for the same reason: to allow the toll 
office to capture the dialed digits for toll billing.  Whether the 1 
prefix was a requirement for regulatory reasons, it was a necessity for 
equipment reasons.  1+ dialing was also sometimes used on common control 
offices in areas with mixed SXS and common control equipment to achieve 
uniform dialing practices.  But many areas that were served by common 
control equipment used 7 digit dialing for local as well as short haul 
toll, without a 1+ prefix to distinguish toll and local.

Steph

Mark Rudholm wrote:
> Maybe I have a southern California bias or something, but I never
> really understood the whole "1+ Toll Alerting" business.  I realize
> some people love it, but I always thought it was silly, and now
> that long-distance is down in the 0-4 cents per minute range, is
> it really that big of a deal?
>
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't 1+ dialing introduced to
> disambiguate out-of-npa calls when generalized (from NNX to NXX)
> office codes were first assigned back in the early 70s?  Back when NPAs
> were all N0/1X and office codes were all NNX, there were no O.C./npa
> collisions, so all calls could be dialed as 7D or 10D without
> ambiguity.  So the idea of 1+ = toll alerting seems like an artifact,
> not something by design.
>
> Living in Los Angeles, where area codes are quite numerous, people
> have generally started just dialing 1+10D for all calls.  Given that,
> it seems to me that the 1 is now just anachronistic baggage, so for
> my systems, I've dropped it.  I just use 10D for all calls.  You
> can use 7D but there's a timeout.
>
> The telcos still require the 1, however.
>
> Also, in 310, which is scheduled for an overlay, 1+10D is now
> mandatory on *all* calls.  I understand the rationale here is that
> since the CLECs will be the ones primarily getting assignments in
> the new area code, the CPUC wanted to level they playing field by
> requiring 11D, thereby eliminating the preferability of 310 office
> codes.
>
> But anyway, meh on 1+ toll alerting, I say.
>
> Dennis D Hock wrote:
>   
>> Absolutely John.  I should have qulified that to say that was the
>> explanation from our Michigan PSC.  Others as you said are no doubt looking
>> at it from their rose colored glasses and implementing accordingly.
>>
>> Dennis
>>
>> -----voip-bounces at ckts.info wrote: -----
>>
>>
>> To: Voice Over IP Tandem for Analog Switches <voip at ckts.info>
>> From: John Novack <jnovack at stromberg-carlson.org>
>> Sent by: voip-bounces at ckts.info
>> Date: 06/01/2007 09:21AM
>> Subject: Re: [VoIP] Numbering - existing use of 311
>>
>>
>>
>> Dennis D Hock wrote:
>> <snip>
>>     
>>> The reason for not iallowing the 1 and ten to complete according to the
>>>       
>> PSC is that everyone knows when you dial 1 it is long distance and this
>> sends the wrong information to the
>>     
>>> customer.  So better to block it.
>>>
>>> Dennis H.
>>>
>>>       
>> Except in IL, where 1 plus is REQUIRED for ALL 10 digit ( 11 digit ) calls
>> Probably other states as well.
>> What we get when technical decisions are allowed to be made by bureaucrats.
>>
>> John Novack
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoIP mailing list
>> VoIP at ckts.info
>> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voipProject Web Page:
>> http://www.ckts.info/
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoIP mailing list
>> VoIP at ckts.info
>> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
>> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>>     
>
> _______________________________________________
> VoIP mailing list
> VoIP at ckts.info
> http://lists.ckts.info/mailman/listinfo/voip
> Project Web Page: http://www.ckts.info/
>
>