Phone Numbers

[zachary_amaryllis]

so a sort of add-on question to this?

how do they determine what an area code actually is? do they just pick the next 'available' one or something else?

i know in the old days (0 or 1 as the middle digit), a 0 middle digit indicated that the state had only one area code at the time of issue (colorado used to be all 303, for example)

but things like 970 and 983 make no sense (to me anyway) and were seemingly picked at random.

[michravera]

867-5309 is a good phone number

and could theoretically be a working phone number in fort morgan, colo

Shhh! One of the large chain drug stores has a valid "Jenny" account in the 805 area code. So, if you want the discount and don't have an account and don't want to sign up, use the Jenny number.

[GaryV]

i know in the old days (0 or 1 as the middle digit), a 0 middle digit indicated that the state had only one area code at the time of issue (colorado used to be all 303, for example)

Actually not.  They picked low numbers for high population areas, because the time saved by not having to wait for dialing the zero meant more calls could go through the switching mechanisms.

But I have no idea who assigns the new ones.

[hotdogPi]

Actually not.  They picked low numbers for high population areas, because the time saved by not having to wait for dialing the zero meant more calls could go through the switching mechanisms.

Yes they did. The middle digit was a 0 for entire states – New Jersey was 201, the most populous entire-state area code.

[Dirt Roads]

how do they determine what an area code actually is? do they just pick the next 'available' one or something else?

i know in the old days (0 or 1 as the middle digit), a 0 middle digit indicated that the state had only one area code at the time of issue (colorado used to be all 303, for example)

In the POTS days (plain ole' telephone service), the system used decadic coding with a 100VDC repeated pulse for each segment of the rotary-dial switch.  The single pulse (Number 1) was reserved for international and long distance dialing.  Thus, the first number in decadic code starts with two pulses (Number 2).  The original North American Numbering Plan (NANP) assigned the fewest pulses to the largest population centers back in the 1940s:  2-1-2 was the lowest decadic code in the system and was given to New York City.  Here's some of the decadic codes:

2-1-2 (5 pulse) New York
2-1-3 (6 pulse) Los Angeles
3-1-2 (6 pulse) Chicago
2-1-4 (7 pulse) Dallas-Fort Worth
3-1-3 (7 pulse) Detroit
4-1-2 (7 pulse) Pittsburgh
2-1-5 (8 pulse) Philadelphia
3-1-4 (8 pulse) St. Louis
4-1-3 (8 pulse) Boston
5-1-2 (8 pulse) San Antonio (but the area code stayed with Austin due to political influence)

Since the Zero was the last digit in the rotary-dial switch, it ended up with ten (10) pulses.  That's why you see smaller states with a zero in the middle.  Zero is also not permitted as the first number, since that was reserved for calls to the Operator (usually to request reverse-charges, help with international dialing, language interpretation or special services).

but things like 970 and 983 make no sense (to me anyway) and were seemingly picked at random.

These weren't all picked at random, but there is no logical rhyme-or-reason related to the decadic code system.  The one that pops into mind is the "3-2-1" area code for the Space Coast of Florida, which was selected because of the blastoff countdown for NASA. 

There were some other special rationale, some of these similar to digital code avoidance techniques that are used in track circuits for the early train control systems.  The loss of a digital bit (changing a digital "1" to a digital "0") is an extremely common computer problem that is not easily detected if adjacent codes are used in close proximity.  For instance, in 4-bit logic, a digital "three" is 0-0-1-1, but it shouldn't be used next to a digital "two" 0-0-1-0 or a digital "one" 0-0-0-1 in the coding sequence.  This is way more complicated than it seems at first, so it wouldn't surprise me if the logical "three" is not transmitted as a digital "three", but I'm not familiar with that coding technique.  Any takers in the audience?

[KeithE4Phx]

Actually not.  They picked low numbers for high population areas, because the time saved by not having to wait for dialing the zero meant more calls could go through the switching mechanisms.

But they messed up Massachusetts.  According to the original plan, metro Boston should have been assigned 413, with the western half of the state as 617.  For some reason, that got reversed.  It's a moot point now, and has been since dial service fell out of favor.

[1995hoo]

The North American Numbering Plan Administrator assigns area codes. They make an effort to assign codes that aren't too similar to a neighboring code where possible, although that hasn't always worked–originally, all of Virginia was 703 (now confined to Northern Virginia) and all of North Carolina was 704 (now confined to Charlotte and 12 surrounding counties).

Some area codes are assigned for a reason–the Space Coast area of Florida was given 321, for example, to reflect the end of a launch countdown. There are some they won't assign, either–for example, when Nevada's 702 needed to be split, there were rumors Las Vegas would get 777, but the industry was unwilling to allow an "easily recognizable code" of that sort in case it were later needed for nationwide purposes. As a general rule, they don't assign area codes with the same three digits or with the same second and third digits (although the same first two digits is OK, like Alabama's 334).

[Takumi]

The North American Numbering Plan Administrator assigns area codes. They make an effort to assign codes that aren't too similar to a neighboring code where possible, although that hasn't always worked–originally, all of Virginia was 703 (now confined to Northern Virginia) and all of North Carolina was 704 (now confined to Charlotte and 12 surrounding counties).

Some area codes are assigned for a reason–the Space Coast area of Florida was given 321, for example, to reflect the end of a launch countdown. There are some they won't assign, either–for example, when Nevada's 702 needed to be split, there were rumors Las Vegas would get 777, but the industry was unwilling to allow an "easily recognizable code" of that sort in case it were later needed for nationwide purposes. As a general rule, they don't assign area codes with the same three digits or with the same second and third digits (although the same first two digits is OK, like Alabama's 334).

In my house there's a rotary phone leftover from when my grandparents were alive, that has the old house number with a 703 area code. It's been 804 since the early 1970s.

[KeithE4Phx]

There are some they won't assign, either–for example, when Nevada's 702 needed to be split, there were rumors Las Vegas would get 777, but the industry was unwilling to allow an "easily recognizable code" of that sort in case it were later needed for nationwide purposes.

Southwestern Arizona is so hot in the summer, that if AC 928 is split, that area should be assigned 666. 

[kkt]

My wife thinks that she still has to enter the 1 (on her cell) before the area code and phone number.

That's the only really good thing that cell phones have going for them!  The sound quality is crap, the reception is crap, the battery life is crap, but at least you don't have to guess whether you have to enter 1 before the area code or not....

[zachary_amaryllis]

My wife thinks that she still has to enter the 1 (on her cell) before the area code and phone number.

That's the only really good thing that cell phones have going for them!  The sound quality is crap, the reception is crap, the battery life is crap, but at least you don't have to guess whether you have to enter 1 before the area code or not....

what i never understood, was the recording on landlines 'you must first dial a 1 when calling this number'. if the system knows you need to dial 1, then... just dial it.

on cells (at least with my carrier) you can dial 1 or not, doesn't affect the call. i think at one time (not sure on this) the dialing of 1 on a cell indicated you were roaming or something.

[Rothman]

My wife thinks that she still has to enter the 1 (on her cell) before the area code and phone number.

That's the only really good thing that cell phones have going for them!  The sound quality is crap, the reception is crap, the battery life is crap, but at least you don't have to guess whether you have to enter 1 before the area code or not....

I've found the reception shockingly clearer than landlines at least over the past five years or so.

I find the frequency that someone "breaks up" on cell phones to be similar to how often someone moved the receiver away from their mouth in the old days.

[mrsman]

Looks like a boundary elimination overlay is being proposed for the Phoenix area:
Arizona Corporation Commission November Open Meeting Highlights (azcc.gov)

This will eliminate the 480/602/623 boundaries for the Phoenix area. While 480 (East Valley) and 602 (most of Phoenix proper) are near exhaustion, 623 (West Valley) has plenty of spare capacity.

I like this.  It's far more convenient to realign the boundaries than to introduce a brand new area code, when it really isn't needed.

No existing customer has to change their telephone number.  All 3 area codes are generally associated with Metro Phoenix.  10 digit dialing is simply not a big deal in the era of cell phones, where your most common calls will be on your phone's address book.

L.A. did something similar.  213 was split multiple times over the years.  In 1998, 323 was split from 213.  213 was basically Downtown LA and the rest of Central LA was in 323.  The exact boundaries were complicated.  Over time, 323 was beginning to exhuast while there were still numbers available in 213.  In 2017, they basically merged the areas of 213 and 323 so that they are now overlays over the zone of the pre-1998 213.

I grew up in the 213 area code.  (213 was an original 1947 area code originally covering all of Southern California.)  I felt lucky that being in central L.A., I got to keep the same number even when 818 split off in 1984 and 310 split off in 1991.  I left home to attend grad school in 1997, but my parents still lived in central L.A. Alas, since they weren't in Downtown, they had to finally relinquish 213 in place of 323.  A few years later, my parents left L.A. so none of this was personally relevant to me anymore.  [I simply can't keep track of all the area codes in Metro LA these days.]

IMO, the 213/323 split was a mistake, it should have been an overlay from the very beginning, particularly as it was very hard to determine the boundaries in map form.  It would have meant that my parents could have kept the same phone number that they had since 1978 all the way until the time that they left L.A.  So it's kind of ironic that (had they stayed) they would have the new area code whereas post-2017 newcomers would get 213 numbers.

So good for Phoenix for picking the more efficient way of allocating phone numbers by rearranging the 3 metro Phoenix area codes until all three reach natural exhaustion.

[J N Winkler]

I think that in another 20 years, maybe less, your cellphone number, for an average middle-class person, is going to be a hint about where you grew up, more than where you lived.

So essentially your phone number is like a Social Security Number + 14 years (assuming kids get a cell phone somewhere around then.)

Good analogy. Although I think they gave up on the first three numbers equaling a state a few years ago.

Social Security numbers began to be assigned randomly out of a national pool during the Obama administration.  (Thanks, Barack!)  This reform was long, long overdue.  (The nineties trend of using the SSN as an ID card number should never have happened in the first place, and there are still plenty of court records with untitivated SSNs hanging around like landmines.  For example, if you had to declare bankruptcy about 20 years ago, your SSN is likely still in plain view for anyone who wishes to look up the paperwork.)

[KEVIN_224]

I remember when (860) was assigned to parts of Connecticut in the fall of 1995. It was optional for the first two months. Middletown and Berlin are (860). Meriden, which borders both towns, is (203). At last check, Meriden is the only (203) town which is/was a local landline call from New Britain (860).

Has there been an overlay for southern New Hampshire? That seems to be the fastest growing part of northern New England. Maine is still entirely (207). The borders of (413) in western Massachusetts, as far as I know, has never changed or been overlayed.

[hotdogPi]

Has there been an overlay for southern New Hampshire? That seems to be the fastest growing part of northern New England.

No. Still entirely one area code. They'll probably add one soon; there's no more disincentive from loss of 7-digit dialing as the suicide crisis hotline already forced 10 digits a month or two ago. (There are still a few area codes that allow 7-digit dialing; 988 had to have been unused as an exchange, or in the case of North Dakota, eliminated explicitly so that 7-digit dialing could continue.)

[kevinb1994]

Has there been an overlay for southern New Hampshire? That seems to be the fastest growing part of northern New England.

No. Still entirely one area code. They'll probably add one soon; there's no more disincentive from loss of 7-digit dialing as the suicide crisis hotline already forced 10 digits a month or two ago. (There are still a few area codes that allow 7-digit dialing; 988 had to have been unused as an exchange, or in the case of North Dakota, eliminated explicitly so that 7-digit dialing could continue.)

The area code here is 904, which is one of those that still allows for 7-digit dialing.

[jp the roadgeek]

I remember when (860) was assigned to parts of Connecticut in the fall of 1995. It was optional for the first two months. Middletown and Berlin are (860). Meriden, which borders both towns, is (203). At last check, Meriden is the only (203) town which is/was a local landline call from New Britain (860).

Has there been an overlay for southern New Hampshire? That seems to be the fastest growing part of northern New England. Maine is still entirely (207). The borders of (413) in western Massachusetts, as far as I know, has never changed or been overlayed.

In general, 203 (and 475 as an overlay) is Fairfield and New Haven County, while 860/959 is the rest of the state.  There are a couple of exceptions: the area formerly served by Woodbury Telephone in Litchfield County (Woodbury, Bethlehem, and part of Roxbury), is 203; while the Fairfield County town of Sherman is 860.  Southington (860) has a large local area in the 203: Meriden, Wolcott, Cheshire, and the Waterbury area (including Prospect and Middlebury).  It required dialing the area code, but not a 1 before it.

Vermont (802) has also never been overlain.  However, 518 (Upstate NY) was overlain with 838 in 2017.

[brad2971]

Looks like a boundary elimination overlay is being proposed for the Phoenix area:
Arizona Corporation Commission November Open Meeting Highlights (azcc.gov)

This will eliminate the 480/602/623 boundaries for the Phoenix area. While 480 (East Valley) and 602 (most of Phoenix proper) are near exhaustion, 623 (West Valley) has plenty of spare capacity.

I like this.  It's far more convenient to realign the boundaries than to introduce a brand new area code, when it really isn't needed.

No existing customer has to change their telephone number.  All 3 area codes are generally associated with Metro Phoenix.  10 digit dialing is simply not a big deal in the era of cell phones, where your most common calls will be on your phone's address book.

L.A. did something similar.  213 was split multiple times over the years.  In 1998, 323 was split from 213.  213 was basically Downtown LA and the rest of Central LA was in 323.  The exact boundaries were complicated.  Over time, 323 was beginning to exhuast while there were still numbers available in 213.  In 2017, they basically merged the areas of 213 and 323 so that they are now overlays over the zone of the pre-1998 213.

I grew up in the 213 area code.  (213 was an original 1947 area code originally covering all of Southern California.)  I felt lucky that being in central L.A., I got to keep the same number even when 818 split off in 1984 and 310 split off in 1991.  I left home to attend grad school in 1997, but my parents still lived in central L.A. Alas, since they weren't in Downtown, they had to finally relinquish 213 in place of 323.  A few years later, my parents left L.A. so none of this was personally relevant to me anymore.  [I simply can't keep track of all the area codes in Metro LA these days.]

IMO, the 213/323 split was a mistake, it should have been an overlay from the very beginning, particularly as it was very hard to determine the boundaries in map form.  It would have meant that my parents could have kept the same phone number that they had since 1978 all the way until the time that they left L.A.  So it's kind of ironic that (had they stayed) they would have the new area code whereas post-2017 newcomers would get 213 numbers.

So good for Phoenix for picking the more efficient way of allocating phone numbers by rearranging the 3 metro Phoenix area codes until all three reach natural exhaustion.

With the 988 suicide hotline forcing a lot of area codes to go to 10-digit dialing (including, of all places, Montana and South Dakota!), expect this practice that LA (213/323), San Diego (619/858), and soon PHX (480/602/623) are using to be a nationwide practice of preserving phone prefixes in fairly short order. The North American Numbering Plan is already two-thirds of the way through its available allotment of area codes.

[Big John]

The North American Numbering Plan is already two-thirds of the way through its available allotment of area codes.

Notice that no area code has a 9 as a second digit.  The proposed plan when they need it is to switch to 4-digit area codes by inserting the 9 as the second digit, so 201 would become 2901, for example.

[CtrlAltDel]

The North American Numbering Plan is already two-thirds of the way through its available allotment of area codes.

Notice that no area code has a 9 as a second digit.  The proposed plan when they need it is to switch to 4-digit area codes by inserting the 9 as the second digit, so 201 would become 2901, for example.

Apparently, that's not the plan anymore. Now, what they want to do is add two digits, initially two zeroes or two ones, to phone numbers to bring them up to twelve digits, so 222-333-4444 would become, say, 2220-0333-4444.

[brad2971]

The North American Numbering Plan is already two-thirds of the way through its available allotment of area codes.

Notice that no area code has a 9 as a second digit.  The proposed plan when they need it is to switch to 4-digit area codes by inserting the 9 as the second digit, so 201 would become 2901, for example.

Apparently, that's not the plan anymore. Now, what they want to do is add two digits, initially two zeroes or two ones, to phone numbers to bring them up to twelve digits, so 222-333-4444 would become, say, 2220-0333-4444.

Here's the thing, though: The whole issue with phone prefixes is that they, and the area codes they are attached to, are largely allocated in an inefficient way. With all the potential area codes available BEFORE you get to having an area code with 9 as a middle digit, there are around 4.75 billion telephone numbers available in the entire North American Numbering Plan (US, Canada, and most Caribbean countries).

Right now, there may be, at best, 1.2 billion numbers actually given to consumers, businesses, and governments. And that's before we even consider that the landline side of the telecom business is in structural decline (in more than just one way).

[steviep24]

The North American Numbering Plan is already two-thirds of the way through its available allotment of area codes.

Notice that no area code has a 9 as a second digit.  The proposed plan when they need it is to switch to 4-digit area codes by inserting the 9 as the second digit, so 201 would become 2901, for example.

Apparently, that's not the plan anymore. Now, what they want to do is add two digits, initially two zeroes or two ones, to phone numbers to bring them up to twelve digits, so 222-333-4444 would become, say, 2220-0333-4444.

Here's the thing, though: The whole issue with phone prefixes is that they, and the area codes they are attached to, are largely allocated in an inefficient way. With all the potential area codes available BEFORE you get to having an area code with 9 as a middle digit, there are around 4.75 billion telephone numbers available in the entire North American Numbering Plan (US, Canada, and most Caribbean countries).

Right now, there may be, at best, 1.2 billion numbers actually given to consumers, businesses, and governments. And that's before we even consider that the landline side of the telecom business is in structural decline (in more than just one way).

One of the issues is that wireless carriers assign phone numbers for every device including tablets. That is a lot of wasted numbers.

[1995hoo]

One of the issues is that wireless carriers assign phone numbers for every device including tablets. That is a lot of wasted numbers.

Essentially, any device that accesses the cellular network gets a number (including mobile hotspots or cellular watches). My old iPad had a phone number. My newer one is WiFi-only and doesn't have one. I don't know whether there's a solution other than assigning a phone number.

[hotdogPi]

One of the issues is that wireless carriers assign phone numbers for every device including tablets. That is a lot of wasted numbers.

Essentially, any device that accesses the cellular network gets a number (including mobile hotspots or cellular watches). My old iPad had a phone number. My newer one is WiFi-only and doesn't have one. I don't know whether there's a solution other than assigning a phone number.

My laptop (which doesn't use cellular data) uses the same phone number as my phone. Doing so with iPads would reduce the number of phone numbers in use.