"Anthony R. Gold" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:28:58 GMT, "Kieran Turner"
wrote:

Ivor Jones wrote:
"Nick Leverton" wrote in message


[snip]

In the early days of UK mobiles you could still just
dial the subscriber part of the number, provided that
they were on your own mobile company's primary range.
E.g. 0836 was (IIRC) Vodafone, and any Vodafone mobile
user could omit the code if they were calling an 0836
code. I believe this also worked for Cellnet on 0860 although
I never had a Cellnet mobile to try it.


No idea, but I can confirm it worked on the old 0836 range.

That didn't work for me from my 0860.

Mine neither and I don't remember it working on 0836 (1986-87) either.

In some parts of the USA we still have 7 digit dialing. And there I can
call from a landline to a cell phone sharing the same Area Code using just
7 digits, but the cell phones always require ten digits to call any NANP
number whether local or not.

That's because US mobile numbers are mostly in the NANP and so appear to
belong to the exchange. OTOH when mobile you are not guaranteed to be in
the local area, so to avoid possible confusion the full 10 digits are
required.


Tony

Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS wrote:
On Nov 19, 8:06 am, "Clive D. W. Feather" cl...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article , Paul Scott
writes

I reckon the long term plan is that 023 will become the Solent area, and the
codes inbetween (geographically speaking) will disappear when they need to
become 8 digit numbers.
As and when areas run out of numbers, the current plan is to introduce
"overlay" codes that will occupy the same area but have 8 figure
numbers.

023 will be used for the south of England. So, suppose that 01983 (Ryde)
runs out of numbers, then a new "Wight" area code will be created
consisting of 023 with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 34. Existing Ryde
numbers will *not* be renumbered. If 01730 (Petersfield) runs out, a new
area code would be 023 with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 61. And so
on.

024 has the same role for central England, 029 for Wales, and 037 to 039
for Scotland.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:

Great information Clive thanks.

Question: This implies 037 and 039 will be exceptions to new non
geaographice "03" codes. Is that right?

No, that is not right. 037-9 are not for Scotland, they are UK-wide
numbers (non-geographic).

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi...plan081107.pdf

037 numbers, for example, are explicitly reserved for operators and
end-users using the corresponding 087 numbers.

On Nov 19, 1:16 pm, Paul Cupis wrote:
Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS wrote:
On Nov 19, 8:06 am, "Clive D. W. Feather" cl...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article , Paul Scott
writes

I reckon the long term plan is that023will become the Solent area, and the
codes inbetween (geographically speaking) will disappear when they need to
become 8 digit numbers.
As and when areas run out of numbers, the current plan is to introduce
"overlay" codes that will occupy the same area but have 8 figure
numbers.

023will be used for the south of England. So, suppose that 01983 (Ryde)
runs out of numbers, then a new "Wight" area code will be created
consisting of023with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 34. Existing Ryde
numbers will *not* be renumbered. If 01730 (Petersfield) runs out, a new
area code would be023with 8 digit numbers beginning (say) 61. And so
on.

024 has the same role for central England, 029 for Wales, and 037 to 039
for Scotland.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:

Great information Clive thanks.

Question: This implies 037 and 039 will be exceptions to new non
geaographice "03" codes. Is that right?

No, that is not right. 037-9 are not for Scotland, they are UK-wide
numbers (non-geographic).

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi...plan081107.pdf

037 numbers, for example, are explicitly reserved for operators and
end-users using the corresponding 087 numbers.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Will there be (an) overlay code(s) for Scotland?

One can't believe folks will like dialling 11 digits in order to reach
nearby neighbors.

Clearly there is no plan to eventually drop 01nnn area codes.

Adrian

In article
,
"Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS" writes
Great information Clive thanks.

You're welcome, but ...

Question: This implies 037 and 039 will be exceptions to new non
geaographice "03" codes. Is that right?

It hadn't clicked with me that this would be an issue.

However, I happened to meet with Ofcom's Numbering Unit a couple of days
ago, and they now believe that changes they have made to number
management, combined with a central portability database in a few years
time, mean that overlays will probably not be needed.

Even if one or two turn out to be necessary, they won't need the full
Scotland plan they had a few years ago, but can use 027.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

On 22 Nov, 14:13, "Clive D. W. Feather" cl...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:

"Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS" writes:

Great information Clive thanks.

You're welcome, but ...

Question: This implies 037 and 039 will be exceptions to new non
geaographice "03" codes. Is that right?

It hadn't clicked with me that this would be an issue.

However, I happened to meet with Ofcom's Numbering Unit a couple of days
ago, and they now believe that changes they have made to number
management, combined with a central portability database in a few years
time, mean that overlays will probably not be needed.

Even if one or two turn out to be necessary, they won't need the full
Scotland plan they had a few years ago, but can use 027.


Thanks for the info.

Overlays sound like a pretty ugly 'solution', I'm glad it sounds like
they're probably off the cards.

I wonder whether the earlier projections for a squeeze on available
numbers aren't a bit out now. I'd think there's far less demand for
second residential lines nowadays, as people don't want dedicated
lines for fax machines or dial-up internet access. Of course, business
still likes direct-dial numbers which certainly has driven demand for
new numbers in certain locations. But I wonder if the real demand in
the future will be for mobile 07 prefixed numbers. That said, well
over half the population has a mobile now and there doesn't appear to
be any problems with 07 number shortages.

May I enquire what the forthcoming central portability database is all
about?

On 23 Nov, 00:36, Mizter T wrote:
I wonder whether the earlier projections for a squeeze on available
numbers aren't a bit out now. I'd think there's far less demand for
second residential lines nowadays, as people don't want dedicated
lines for fax machines or dial-up internet access. Of course, business
still likes direct-dial numbers which certainly has driven demand for
new numbers in certain locations. But I wonder if the real demand in
the future will be for mobile 07 prefixed numbers. That said, well
over half the population has a mobile now and there doesn't appear to
be any problems with 07 number shortages.

Landlines are only an issue because the numbers after "01" and "02"
mean something, which means you can't (e.g.) fill the demand for new
numbers in London by using the spare capacity in the 01620 range (I'm
guessing there are rather fewer than a million landlines in North
Berwick...).

Since mobile codes signify nothing of any use ["the operator that you
signed up with eight years ago, before porting your number twice to
get whizzy new phones" is not IMO information that's of any use], the
same problems don't arise.

There are a billion unique numbers with the 07 prefix. Even if you
take out the 070 range (used for personal numbers IIRC), that means
everyone in the UK can have around 15 mobile devices each.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

On 23 Nov, 09:48, John B wrote:
On 23 Nov, 00:36, Mizter T wrote:

I wonder whether the earlier projections for a squeeze on available
numbers aren't a bit out now. I'd think there's far less demand for
second residential lines nowadays, as people don't want dedicated
lines for fax machines or dial-up internet access. Of course, business
still likes direct-dial numbers which certainly has driven demand for
new numbers in certain locations. But I wonder if the real demand in
the future will be for mobile 07 prefixed numbers. That said, well
over half the population has a mobile now and there doesn't appear to
be any problems with 07 number shortages.

Landlines are only an issue because the numbers after "01" and "02"
mean something, which means you can't (e.g.) fill the demand for new
numbers in London by using the spare capacity in the 01620 range (I'm
guessing there are rather fewer than a million landlines in North
Berwick...).

Since mobile codes signify nothing of any use ["the operator that you
signed up with eight years ago, before porting your number twice to
get whizzy new phones" is not IMO information that's of any use], the
same problems don't arise.

There are a billion unique numbers with the 07 prefix. Even if you
take out the 070 range (used for personal numbers IIRC), that means
everyone in the UK can have around 15 mobile devices each.


Yes I had considered the non-geographic nature of mobile numbers, but
I hadn't done the maths, so thanks for that! However I was aware that
mobiles only use the 077, 078 and 079 number ranges - though having
just checked this I see that 075 has just been allocated as a new
mobile number range. Meanwhile 070 personal numbers are moving to a
new 06 range to avoid confusion with mobiles, whilst 076 is for
pagers. So that means that 072, 073 and 074 (and eventually 070) will
be available for mobile numbering in the future too. So, as you say,
there won't be any shortage of numbers.

I'll take issue with you saying that "mobile codes signify nothing of
any use" these days - when calling from a landline you may be charged
at different rates according to what mobile number you're dialling -
and they charge according to which network owns that number range
(i.e. that of the network or provider the number was originally with),
as opposed to which network the mobile subscriber may now be with
(i.e. after porting it around).

I've just had a quick check here http://www.magsys.co.uk/telecom/
tarifres1.htm and from a *very quick* glance it would seem that on
many residential tariffs calls to most mobiles are charged at the same
rate, though this certainly wasn't always the case - and calls to the
Three network remain cheaper than other networks.

In article
,
Mizter T writes
Overlays sound like a pretty ugly 'solution', I'm glad it sounds like
they're probably off the cards.

They're a lot better than the alternatives (area splits, like the London
01 - 071+081, and length changing, like Reading 01734-0118), both of
which affect existing customers as well.

I wonder whether the earlier projections for a squeeze on available
numbers aren't a bit out now. I'd think there's far less demand for
second residential lines nowadays, as people don't want dedicated
lines for fax machines or dial-up internet access. Of course, business
still likes direct-dial numbers which certainly has driven demand for
new numbers in certain locations.

The overwhelming cause of number shortages is new telephone companies,
because numbers are allocated in blocks of 1000 (formerly 10,000). So if
five new VoIP providers start up and want numbers in Cambridge, that's
5,000 numbers gone just like that (and a couple of years ago, 50,000
gone just like that).

May I enquire what the forthcoming central portability database is all
about?

Let's suppose you started with a BT line, but then moved to Virgin Media
while keeping your number. At present, when somebody calls you, the call
is sent to the BT exchange handling your old (now removed) line. This
notes that you're a ported customer, sticks a prefix (say 527724) on the
front of your number, and re-injects the call into the trunk network.
This prefix means that it's now routed to the VM exchange handling your
line, which can deliver the call to you. This technique is called
"onward routeing" and is relatively inefficient.

The new database will contain every telephone number in the UK together
with a code indicating which exchange it is connected to. When someone
calls you, *their* telephone exchange looks up your number in the
database and adds the code on the front. The rest of the network will
then route on the basis of the code, not your number.

One effect of this is that ported calls are routed more efficiently. It
also means that numbers don't need to be allocated in blocks - there are
no problems with giving consecutive numbers to different telephone
companies. And, finally, it makes it trivial to port your number to a
different place.
[*] I simplify slightly, but the code contains enough information to get
the call by the most efficient route to the correct exchange.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

In article
,
John B writes
Landlines are only an issue because the numbers after "01" and "02"
mean something, which means you can't (e.g.) fill the demand for new
numbers in London by using the spare capacity in the 01620 range

True, though there are a number of spare codes, such as 01220, 01532,
01734, and 01999.

(I'm
guessing there are rather fewer than a million landlines in North
Berwick...).

Not long ago Benbecula was officially listed as being short of numbers.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 04:01:30 -0800 (PST), Mizter T wrote:
I've just had a quick check here http://www.magsys.co.uk/telecom/
tarifres1.htm and from a *very quick* glance it would seem that on
many residential tariffs calls to most mobiles are charged at the same
rate, though this certainly wasn't always the case - and calls to the
Three network remain cheaper than other networks.

What provider would this be? Almost without exception I've found calls to
Three are significantly more expensive than the other 4 networks, and at
best the same price.

--
-- Michael "Soruk" McConnell Eridani Star System
MailStripper - http://www.MailStripper.eu/ - SMTP spam filter
Second Number - http://secondnumber.matrixnetwork.co.uk/