[188723] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: phone fun,
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Owen DeLong)
Wed Apr 13 16:14:10 2016
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Owen DeLong <owen@delong.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.OSX.2.11.1604131531340.9650@ary.lan>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2016 13:12:46 -0700
To: "John R. Levine" <johnl@iecc.com>
Cc: nanog@nanog.org
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
> On Apr 13, 2016, at 12:45 , John R. Levine <johnl@iecc.com> wrote:
>=20
>>> NANP geographical numbers can be located to a switch (give
>>> or take number portability within a LATA), but non-geographic =
numbers
>>> can really go anywhere. On the third hand, it's still true that the
>>> large majority of them are in the U.S.
>>=20
>> Would you agree that 408-921 is a geographic number?
>=20
> No. It's a prefix, assigned to the at&t switch in west San Jose.
>=20
>> I guarantee you that there are phones within that prefix within =
US/Calif/LATA-1 and also some well outside of that, probably not even in =
the same country.
>=20
> Who said anything about phones? Could you describe what "geographic =
numbers can be located to a switch" means to you?
I guarantee you that many, if not most at this point, of those numbers =
are no longer actually handled by that switch most of the time.
I suspect that there are more SS7 exceptions than default within that =
particular prefix which is why I chose it.
Owen
