[83645] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: New N.Y. Law Targets Hidden Net LD Tolls
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Lou Katz)
Fri Aug 19 17:11:42 2005
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 14:11:16 -0700
From: Lou Katz <lou@metron.com>
To: North American Noise and Off-topic Gripes <nanog@merit.edu>
Mail-Followup-To: North American Noise and Off-topic Gripes <nanog@merit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <022e01c5a4f3$5ccdda50$6701a8c0@dax>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
On Fri, Aug 19, 2005 at 02:20:59PM -0500, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>
> Thus spake "Robert Bonomi" <bonomi@mail.r-bonomi.com>
> [ attribution to me missing ]
> >>That's why some states (e.g. Texas) require that all toll calls be
> >>dialed as 1+ _regardless of area code_, and local calls cannot be
> >>dialed as 1+. If you dial a number wrong, you get a message telling
> >>you how to do it properly (and why).
> >
> >In some places that "solution" is _not_practical_. As in where the same
> >three digit sequence is in use as a C.O. 'prefix', *and* as an areacode.
> >(an where, in some 'perverse' situations, the foreign area-code is a
> >'non-toll' call, yet the bare prefix within the areacode is a toll call.
>
> We don't have that problem because all nearby area codes are reserved as
> prefixes. For instance, if 214 and 817 are nearby, there exist no 214-817
> or 817-214 numbers (or 214-214 or 817-817). Duh?
>
Not here! I have a 510-530-887X number. They assigned 530 as an area code
to an area around Sacramento, not far from here. That region uses the 887
prefix, so I get LOTS of wrong numbers where they forgot to dial the 1.
Fooey.
--
-=[L]=-
