OP makes his own points against it, and none for. As we add more and more short numbers and possibly NPAs, the 9 becomes more problematic. And is there really a switch out there in use today that needs it?
We have to kill old paradigms to move ahead. On Sun, Jul 17, 2022 at 11:04 PM Ross Tajvar <[email protected]> wrote: > re: dialing 9 - I understand the plight of having to deal with legacy > expectations, but what's the point of sticking with this particular > one? What makes it not-useless? > > On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 12:29 AM Hunter Fuller <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > We operate a system with the "dial 9" scheme (apparently "useless" > > according to other posters - a truly insightful attitude that I love > > to see on this list), so I can say that the expectation definitely is > > NOT for people to dial 9911. In fact, there is a whole law about it, > > which, like many, is written in blood: > > https://www.fcc.gov/news-events/podcast/personal-story-behind-karis-law > > > > The difference is, if someone picks up a phone and dials 911, they > > want 911. They don't want an "outside line" so that they can dial a > > NANP 10-digit number beginning in 11, because no such number exists. > > The problem is, such numbers DO exist that begin with 88, so, we are > > in a bit of a pickle there. It seems the only solution is to do a > > timeout... yeesh. (Unless I'm missing something.) > > > > Dialing 911 directly (not 9911, but just 911) has always worked here, > > long before Kari's Law, and it works without delay, as it should. I'd > > love to make 988 work the same way but I'm just not sure how to > > accomplish that. > > > > -- > > Hunter Fuller (they) > > Router Jockey > > VBH M-1C > > +1 256 824 5331 > > > > Office of Information Technology > > The University of Alabama in Huntsville > > Network Engineering > > > > > > -- > > Hunter Fuller (they) > > Router Jockey > > VBH M-1C > > +1 256 824 5331 > > > > Office of Information Technology > > The University of Alabama in Huntsville > > Network Engineering > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 11:21 AM Brandon Svec > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > It shouldn't be much different than 911. 9911 and 911 can both work > just as 9988 and 988 can both work fine with most any PBX that can > translate dial plan digits. > > > > > > There is potential conflict with systems that can't handle inter-digit > timeouts to allow both 988 and 9888-555-1212, I guess. But in that case I > suppose the expectation would be to dial 9988 and 9911 already.. > > > Brandon > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 8:10 AM Zilk, David <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> > > >> How are folks dealing with allowing calls to 9-8-8 when an access > code of 9 is used. Does this not cause a conflict when calling toll free > numbers beginning with an NPA of 88x? > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> David > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> VoiceOps mailing list > > >> [email protected] > > >> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > VoiceOps mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > > _______________________________________________ > > VoiceOps mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops > _______________________________________________ > VoiceOps mailing list > [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops >
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
