[Asterisk-Users] How to number extensions - Which way is best?

[Steven Critchfield]

On Tue, 2005-02-08 at 16:11 -0600, brett-asterisk at worldcall.net wrote:
> Tim Burt wrote:
> 
> >PLUS...
> >Numbering your extensions in the "100" to "119" range (or for larger
> >environments 1000 to 1199) will provide the cleanest interface.  This is
> >because a leading 1 indicates a long distance call, and the number
> >following a leading 1 cannot be a "0" or a "1" for long distance. 
> >Therefore, asterisk can determine with the second digit dialed that you
> >are dialing an extension, and not a long distance number.
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> Just a general comment.. Slightly OT, but others might find it 
> interesting. The ORIGINAL intention of leading a phone number with a "1" 
> was NOT a toll indication. In fact, it was explicitly NOT a toll 
> indicator. Rather it was an indicator that 10 digits would follow. It 
> just happened that that _typically_ a 10 digit phone number was a toll 
> call. Given that and the natual evolution of the network, the original 
> meaning was bastardized.

Funny, my memory has been that 1 was always toll as it was possibly to
dial a 7 digit number prefixed by a 1 and it was LD. Of course that may
be that for the longest time I lived in areas where the entire state
could be a single area code without risk of running out of numbers. At
that point you only dialed the 10 digit number if you dialed out of
state.
-- 
Steven Critchfield <critch at basesys.com>