Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.android > #59544

Re: use of the plus sign

Show all headers | View raw

On 01/02/2019 19.05, NY wrote:
> "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote in message
> news:fmdeif-42c.ln1@Telcontar.valinor...
>> On 01/02/2019 17.58, NY wrote:
>>> "Frank Slootweg" <this@ddress.is.invalid> wrote in message
>>> news:q31s3j.cg8.1@ID-201911.user.individual.net...
>>>> NY <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>>>>> "Lars Enderin" <lars.enderin@telia.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:72662561-2c3c-dc81-5b61-4622b13b7eff@telia.com...
>>>>> > 2019-02-01 11:45 skrev  NY:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> What intrigues me is that several countries (UK, Sweden, Netherlands,
>>> Israel) have the same issue of a leading digit which is dialled within
>>> the country but not from abroad, and yet none have done the obvious
>>> thing of reprogramming their exchanges so that if a call arrives at an
>>> exchange from overseas as opposed to another exchange within the country
>>> and the first digit after the country code (eg 44 of UK) is a zero,
>>> discard that zero before passing the rest of the digits onto the normal
>>> exchange selection code.
>>
>> The 44 is usually removed by the originating country.
>>
>> And then the originating country support service gets the question from
>> clients "I dial +44 01296 xxxxx and I get wrong number - what is going
>> on? The number is correct". Yes, I was the support person at the inside
>> second level, those that the talking staff ask the questions from. I saw
>> that question more than once. Of course, with the usual countries you
>> learn, but then comes a strange new country and you have to ask further
>> up or far...
> 
> But the destination country can always distinguish between a call that
> has originated within the country and one that has originated outside -
> can't it?

Yes. They know because they enter via a different "cable".

Routing is fixed, not dynamic. They know were each "cable" comes from
and what calls it can carry. I'm saying cable but the term is "route",
and it can be a bunch of cables, or slots in some transmission system.

And the routing tables take into account the route the call is coming from.


> So it can always know whether or nor to strip off a leading
> zero (or treat it as optional, which amounts to the same thing). So why
> isn't that done?

It is an interesting question. But not having worked in Britain, I have
no idea why they added that zero, what is the purpose. I suppose there
is some simplification in the routing that assumes the zero is there.

Spain was like that when I started work in telephone, but with a 9. If
there was a starting nine, the assumption was an area code was
following. Ie, it worked as area prefix indicator, and if not (and not a
zero) it was a same area number.


> With modern exchanges using software rather than
> mechanical rotary switches to decode and route the call, surely it's a
> comparatively easy thing to build into a release of the exchange
> software. 

LOL, no. Modern digital exchanges can be designs from the 80's, with
very limited computing power (as compared to your desktop computer).
There is no intention to modernize them, instead they are being replaced
with VoIP systems (of which I know little of the actual systems used).

On the POT exchanges, upgrading the software is something terribly
expensive. A small exchange could be 60 million euros hardware with
installation, they told me once. A software upgrade, I don't know (over
my pay grade to know), but a huge amount.

> After all, they managed to introduce an extra 1 into the codes
> for most exchanges, and to handle migration from 01 xxx xxxx to 071 xxx
> xxxx to 0171 xxx xxxx to 020 7xxx xxxx for London numbers, so stripping
> off a zero should be simple.
> 
> There's evidently a problem with doing it that hasn't occurred to me, so
> I'm intrigued to know what it might be.

Same here, but there surely is something :-)

Consider too that when a change to the numbering plan is applied, they
have to give an a hour:minute:second to apply it, and hope there are no
errors, that service remains working.  Basically they prepare the tables
at all the exchanges, and hit commands at some instant to apply.
Designing the tables needs weeks.


All that talk is about the old systems I knew. The moderns ones, VoIP
internally, I don't really know how they are. I don't know about
Britain, but in Spain there is currently a mixture of old and new
systems; there is migration in course, while having to keep compatibility...

Ah, mobile phone exchanges are more modern than the fixed line
exchanges. In Spain, I believe most are Ericsson (AXE?).

-- 
Cheers, Carlos.

Back to comp.mobile.android | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

use of the plus sign micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2019-01-29 04:47 -0500
  Re: use of the plus sign Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2019-01-29 10:05 +0000
    Re: use of the plus sign Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2019-01-29 10:11 +0000
      Re: use of the plus sign micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2019-01-29 06:55 -0500
    Re: use of the plus sign "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-01 10:45 +0000
      Re: use of the plus sign Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2019-02-01 12:07 +0100
        Re: use of the plus sign "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-01 11:54 +0000
          Re: use of the plus sign micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2019-02-01 10:17 -0500
          Re: use of the plus sign Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-01 15:28 +0000
            Re: use of the plus sign "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-01 16:58 +0000
              Re: use of the plus sign Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2019-02-01 17:29 +0000
              Re: use of the plus sign "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-02-01 18:53 +0100
                Re: use of the plus sign "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-01 18:05 +0000
                Re: use of the plus sign "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-02-01 19:59 +0100
              Re: use of the plus sign Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-01 21:09 +0000
                Re: use of the plus sign Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-01 22:08 +0000
                Re: use of the plus sign micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2019-02-02 00:21 -0500
                Re: use of the plus sign Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-02 09:23 +0000
                Re: use of the plus sign "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-02-01 23:22 +0100
                Re: use of the plus sign Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> - 2019-02-02 19:27 +0000
            Re: use of the plus sign Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> - 2019-02-01 21:58 +0000
            Re: use of the plus sign Piet <www.godfatherof.nl/@opt-in.invalid> - 2019-02-02 11:12 +0100
              Re: use of the plus sign Frank Slootweg <this@ddress.is.invalid> - 2019-02-02 18:04 +0000
              Re: use of the plus sign Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2019-02-02 18:12 +0000
              Re: use of the plus sign "NY" <me@privacy.net> - 2019-02-02 19:52 +0000
                Re: use of the plus sign nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2019-02-02 15:23 -0500
      Re: use of the plus sign "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-02-01 14:00 +0100
  Re: use of the plus sign "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2019-01-29 13:20 +0100
    Re: use of the plus sign micky <NONONOmisc07@bigfoot.com> - 2019-01-30 07:51 -0500
  Re: use of the plus sign Chris in Makati <mail@nospam.com> - 2019-01-29 13:54 +0000
  Re: use of the plus sign Joerg Lorenz <hugybear@gmx.ch> - 2019-01-29 18:00 +0100
  Re: use of the plus sign Ralph Fox <-rf-nz-@-.invalid> - 2019-02-02 07:34 +1300

csiph-web