Fogbow

If I remember correctly there was a scare several years ago that the USA (after the VOIP area codes were in place for close to a decade) that we were going to run out of phone numbers to the point where at least another digit would have to be added to prevent recycling? about the time where IPv6 was to take over....no nothing can be blocked no matter what the FCC does.

mojosapien wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 1:00 pm If I remember correctly there was a scare several years ago that the USA (after the VOIP area codes were in place for close to a decade) that we were going to run out of phone numbers to the point where at least another digit would have to be added to prevent recycling? about the time where IPv6 was to take over....no nothing can be blocked no matter what the FCC does.

That's sorta how it rolled, but not totally on target.

Today, most (pretty much all) carriers block calls or at least flag them before they reach your phone.

I remember, perhaps 4 years ago, proving to a casual friend how easy it was to spoof a phone number. I'm sitting at a bar with he and his wife. I called his cellphone from my phone using his own number on the caller ID. The blood from his face drained -- and then I really really felt bad cause this dude is kind of a techie and gamer hermit. He was visibly distraught .

Yep, that's how easy it was. Not so much anymore.

that were the days where Orly Taitz took a call with the White House exchange phone number as caller ID

I just did a quick Google search and found a couple of articles that, taken together, are useful.

There are currently about 320 area codes in use, with 800 possible, due to the rules about how area codes are assigned.

Within an area code, each phone number has seven digits. In theory, a seven digit number has a maximum value of 9,999,999. Again, due to the rules for assigning numbers (no numbers begin with zero, for example), there are 7,920,000 numbers possible in each area code.

7,920,000 numbers/area code x 320 area codes = 2,534,400,000 numbers available in the currently used area codes.

If all 800 possible area codes were used, the total is raised significantly:

7,920,000 x 800 = 6,336,000,000.

Some densely populated areas may be approaching the 7,920,000 numbers. This happened in Ohio, about 25 years ago. Most of northeast Ohio, from Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown, were in the 216 area code. The phone system created several new area codes, including 440 and 330. The 440 area code is mostly the area west of Cleveland. 330 is Akron and Youngstown.

So, if an area code approaches the 7.9M mark, they can add a new area code. My area code changed from 216 to 440, but the seven digit number did not. I think that the transition period was on the order of five years. During that time, I have to update relatives, banks and other businesses with my new number, but it wasn't too big a deal. After the transition period the numbers transferred from 216 to 440, for example, were available to be reassigned to new phones in the 216 area code.

None of the articles I saw made any reference to VOIP area codes causing any issues.

So, I don't see that we are in any danger of running out of phone numbers. Some users may be disrupted by moving to newly created area codes, but there seem to be plenty of numbers available. The 6.3B number allows every man, woman and child to have 18 phone numbers.

noblepa wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:09 pm Some densely populated areas may be approaching the 7,920,000 numbers. This happened in Ohio, about 25 years ago. Most of northeast Ohio, from Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown, were in the 216 area code. The phone system created several new area codes, including 440 and 330. The 440 area code is mostly the area west of Cleveland. 330 is Akron and Youngstown.

None of the articles I saw made any reference to VOIP area codes causing any issues.

I lived through that transition in the area. 216-->440. Landlines. (East burb -- Willoughby, if you are curious)

The new 440 wrapped the east and west burbs. 330 south down to Akron.

Most major metro areas experienced similar.

And, no, VOIP or IPv6 had no impact on problems with fake calls in the current environment.

noblepa wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:09 pm So, I don't see that we are in any danger of running out of phone numbers. Some users may be disrupted by moving to newly created area codes, but there seem to be plenty of numbers available. The 6.3B number allows every man, woman and child to have 18 phone numbers.

IIRC, back in the early 90's there was a big worry that certain area codes were quickly running out of phone numbers because of dial-up internet, fax, etc were making it so the need for new numbers was exploding.

At 7.9 million possible phone numbers per area code, covering all of the United States and Canada with room to grow originally required only 90 or so of the 134 available codes. But then came faxes and cellular phones and computers and the Internet. (If you want to do your bit for overuse of phone lines, you can get on the Internet and find a complete list of past and future codes at Bellcore's World Wide Web site: http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/.)

Exploding demand for phone numbers in the 1990's changed the introduction of new area codes from a twice-a-decade event to a weekly routine. And with the growth of nontraditional area codes have come increasingly acrimonious squabbles. Almost everybody hates the idea of ''overlaying'' a new code on an old one, using it for new numbers in the old code's territory, because under current regulations, everyone in the area has to dial 11 digits for every call -- a prospect that Manhattanites may face.

But even in the new era, a number is more than just a number. Is it a coincidence that Wisconsin's new area code is 920, and the Green Bay Packers star defensive end Reggie White wears jersey number 92? As it happens, no, a Bellcore spokesman said.

And Bellcore says its engineers know better than to assign anyone area code 666.

https://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/10/busi ... codes.html

Jim wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:35 pm

noblepa wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:09 pm So, I don't see that we are in any danger of running out of phone numbers. Some users may be disrupted by moving to newly created area codes, but there seem to be plenty of numbers available. The 6.3B number allows every man, woman and child to have 18 phone numbers.

IIRC, back in the early 90's there was a big worry that certain area codes were quickly running out of phone numbers because of dial-up internet, fax, etc were making it so the need for new numbers was exploding.

At 7.9 million possible phone numbers per area code, covering all of the United States and Canada with room to grow originally required only 90 or so of the 134 available codes. But then came faxes and cellular phones and computers and the Internet. (If you want to do your bit for overuse of phone lines, you can get on the Internet and find a complete list of past and future codes at Bellcore's World Wide Web site: http://www.bellcore.com/NANP/.)

Exploding demand for phone numbers in the 1990's changed the introduction of new area codes from a twice-a-decade event to a weekly routine. And with the growth of nontraditional area codes have come increasingly acrimonious squabbles. Almost everybody hates the idea of ''overlaying'' a new code on an old one, using it for new numbers in the old code's territory, because under current regulations, everyone in the area has to dial 11 digits for every call -- a prospect that Manhattanites may face.

But even in the new era, a number is more than just a number. Is it a coincidence that Wisconsin's new area code is 920, and the Green Bay Packers star defensive end Reggie White wears jersey number 92? As it happens, no, a Bellcore spokesman said.

And Bellcore says its engineers know better than to assign anyone area code 666.

https://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/10/busi ... codes.html

In the nineties, cell phone use was expanding rapidly, but people were not yet cutting the cord on their land lines. Dial-up computer access caused some people to pay for a second land line.

Today, most people probably get their online access via cable companies, and a lot of people are ditching their land lines in favor of cell phones. Pagers are a thing of the past, so there probably isn't as much pressure to obtain new numbers.

I grew up in the 313 (my home until I was 6 was a few blocks north of 8 Mile*), in high school it split and went 810, then I went away to college and it split again to 248.

_{*and 10 miles west of Woodward}

noblepa wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:43 pm In the nineties, cell phone use was expanding rapidly, but people were not yet cutting the cord on their land lines. Dial-up computer access caused some people to pay for a second land line.

I had 9.
8 for my BBS and 1 for my personal land line.

Neon was hogging up all the numbers.

In Australia we have 8 digit numbers and 1 digit area codes.

So Victoria is area code 3. New South Wales is 2. To call NSW from Vic you dial 02 nnnn nnnn. The 0 signals you ca.ing out of your area code.

Mobile phones (cell phone to you) are ALL in area code 4. People are dropping landlines at a rate of knots. We have got to be pushing the limit in area code 4 pretty soon. Nobody is mentioning it. I'll have to make inquiries.

Maybe I'll ttry asking Dr. Karl

Edtt mobiles are area 4 or 5 in Oz

Mrs. V and I peaked at 8 phone numbers when we were still working and also had a tablet that used the cell phone towers. Now we just have the 2 mobile phones.

We have different area codes on the 2 phones because hers was purchased before Houston got a second area code and mine was purchased later once we decided we both needed our own mobile phone.

W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 4:50 pm I grew up in the 313 (my home until I was 6 was a few blocks north of 8 Mile*), in high school it split and went 810, then I went away to college and it split again to 248.

I was on the other side of Michigan where it was 616. I moved up north and remained 616, until I became 231. Then my parents ended up on 269.

mojosapien wrote: ↑Tue Nov 29, 2022 1:00 pm If I remember correctly there was a scare several years ago that the USA (after the VOIP area codes were in place for close to a decade) that we were going to run out of phone numbers to the point where at least another digit would have to be added to prevent recycling? about the time where IPv6 was to take over....no nothing can be blocked no matter what the FCC does.

Are they trying to prevent recycling numbers now? I wish they had done that with landlines earlier as it would have cut down on collection calls I would get when I lived in Evanston for a previous holder of that phone number. It's possible that they were pulling the address and then calling my number as I was the current occupant but I thought I figured out it was the number they had and not the address. Hard to say with collection calls.

Update: I just checked the number I had in Evanston (a land line) and it appears to have been recycled. I was the second of 3 folks who may have had it (of course, this public record checks can be hit and miss, in this case, I think it has it down pretty good, almost creepy good as it has my correct addresses back to 1990 and reminds me of my age, which I did not care for).

I grew up in the SF Bay Area
first area code was 415
then came 510
then finally 925

From the USian FCC:

To reduce unwanted and intrusive calls intended for a phone number's previous owner, the Commission now requires service providers to regularly report permanent number disconnections and to wait a minimum of 45 days before reassigning a disconnected number to a new user.

I remember growing up using only 7 numbers to dial someone. Then we moved to Germany. I think it was 6 numbers to call someone. Not too long after moving back stateside you had to start using the area code too.

It's been awhile. Memory is very fuzzy.

I remember the first time I was in the UK on a work trip.
It seemed like the count of numbers you had to dial for any given call was totally random.

jez wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:59 am I remember growing up using only 7 numbers to dial someone. Then we moved to Germany. I think it was 6 numbers to call someone. Not too long after moving back stateside you had to start using the area code too.

It's been awhile. Memory is very fuzzy.

My drama teacher in high school (longer ago than I care to admit) told us a story. Back in the thirties and forties, they hadn't yet standardized on seven digit numbers throughout the country, but New York, being the most densely populated city had. Than, as now, actors from all over the country came to town, seeking fame and fortune, often from small towns in "fly over country". Actors would sometimes lie about their acting experience, so in auditions, the director would ask the actor to do an impromptu scene and dial a telephone. If the actor dialed five or six digits, instead of seven, the director knew that they were fresh off the train.

When I was in college in the early ‘70s I stayed at my boyfriend’s family farm in NW Iowa. When the phone rang, you had to listen to hear if it was “your” ring before you answered.

I’m sure I’m not the only one on this board who remembers party lines. You had your own number, but you shared a phone line. My grandma had a party line. You could literally listen in on other people’s phone conversations. Of course, that was considered rude. Since my dad was a physician, we had a private line.

I did a bit of quick research, and there was a Congressional hearing back in 2002 to discuss problems associated with creating/splitting area codes, and whether the then-current numbering plan strategy was feasible moving forward, especially with the blossoming of mobile phones (then just really getting started), fax lines, computer internet lines, etc.

Running out of area codes was one problem. Another was running out of exchange codes (the next three numbers). Phone numbers had previously been allocated to local exchanges based on area code + exchange, in blocks of 10,000. This was inefficient, because many local exchanges (such as the small town where I was raised) just don’t need a full block of numbers. A single corporate PBX system might take up a whole block of numbers, which was not a concern in 1980 but might be inefficient and problematic today.

One of the outcomes of that hearing was a growth in “overlay” codes for new numbers, especially mobile. Another (maybe already just being tested) was to assign number blocks in units of 1000.

Since then, we have seen some significant technical progress that allows even more efficient use of the range of available numbers. Computerized switching and IP-based call routing means carriers no longer need to worry as much about the geographic logic of the numbering system. Number portability also means we don’t have as many “aging/deprecated” numbers laying fallow and not being used for the year or so it takes for them to be eligible for reassignment. The growth in new mobile phone connections is offset to some degree by a reduction in landlines in general, including dedicated fax and computer lines. Businesses are increasingly giving up landlines and PBX systems in favor of mobile or VOIP solutions.

EDIT to continue my thoughts…

So the problem in 2002 was not that we were running out of potentially available numbers. It was that inefficient number assignment, coupled with population/demand growth in certain areas that put pressure on the then-current numbering strategy, meant that even just making use of new area codes could entail costs and inconveniences to phone customers.

We should have about 10 billion available numbers in the plan, minus numbers that will never be used — there won’t be a “911” area code, for example, so that locks out a ten million numbers. But we have a lot of numbers out there, even if many of us have multiple phone numbers (I have three, between personal and work). In the short run, the bigger problem is to make sure we are allocating numbers efficiently across the available number space.

Continuing on the exchange theme...What were your exchanges from your yute? I can recall several from Southern California:

CApitol...CItrus...SYcamore...LEhigh...GIlbert...LIberty...THornwall...RIchmond...YUkon...CHase...CHurchill(*)...AXminister. Then there was the ZEnith exchange that could only be accessed through the operator. The CHP had a ZEnith number. Many more of course that I've forgotten.

*The CHurchill exchange was for "toll" calls outside your free area. Normally, the person placing the call would have to pay an increased per-minute charge to dial a number outside their immediate area. But this prefix, and I am sure others, reversed that. The caller was not charged; the owner of the phone number paid the fee. These were the beginnings of the 800 phone numbers.

I sorta miss those old prefixes.

TRiangle

Volkonski wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 5:42 pmTRiangle

Trying to decipher what you are going for here. Two capital letters followed by...

I'm probably off-base.

I recall it was very common for persons or businesses to advert their digits with the first two as letters followed by rest as numbers.

Up in northeast Ohio there was company that heavily advertised on the radio. Nice jingle that everyone knew and you could kinda not help but sing-along.

"Garfield 1, 2323"
(GA1-2323)

-------------------

Also, do any of you remember your home # from when you were a kid-kid? I do, instantly. I can't remember most other ones as the years clicked by, but I remember my pre-teen home number.

278-2109

neonzx wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 6:33 pm Also, do any of you remember your home # from when you were a kid-kid?

The first number I ever memorized was my grandparents’ number - they lived about 20 minutes away, and I got to call and let them know we were on the way to Sunday dinner, but I had to dial for myself.

The second number I memorized was our house line. It’s still mom’s number to this day.

The only other number I have memorized is my own. I let my phone do the remembering for everyone else. I’m hosed if I ever have to make bail.

In Michigan, our prefix was YEllowstone.

In Arizona our prefix was boring old MAin.

Found it on YouTube (of course). LOL