home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!ukma!darwin.sura.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!lll-winken!telecom-request
- From: whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h)
- Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
- Subject: Re: Dumb Question About LATA/Toll
- Message-ID: <telecom12.854.8@eecs.nwu.edu>
- Date: 16 Nov 92 13:34:00 GMT
- Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
- Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
- Lines: 26
- Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
- X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
- X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
- X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 854, Message 8 of 12
-
- > Does anyone know the exact rule by which LATAs were drawn up? PAT]
-
- As near as I can recall, LATA's were determined using population
- centers called SMAs. An SMA was a S(not sure what the S stands for)
- Metropolitan Area. I think the goal was to have a limited number of
- SMAs in any one LATA. Additional considerations were the existing
- geographic and political boundaries, existing telco service areas,
- etc. The intent was to indeed make all inter-LATA calls served by an
- inter-LATA carrier. The practicality of that lead, however, to
- numerous exceptions such as, NJ Hudson River communities and NYC,
- Camden, NJ and Philadelphia, etc. Those special exemptions allowed
- for existing non-toll calling that was handled by the two local
- exchange carriers to continue. There are something like 160 LATA's.
-
-
- Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
-
- Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process
- bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below.
- Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
- Morristown, NJ email via UUCP bcr!dancer!whs70
- 201-829-2879 Weekdays email via Internet whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com
-
-
- [Moderator's Note: The /S/ is either 'Statistical' or 'Standard'. PAT]
-