Talk:Office classification

What is this page about?
I have no idea what is going on here. This page needs someone to offer some explanation and clarification. Chart123 20:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)


 * It's something about how the phone network worked, but that's all I can tell. RJFJR 16:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yeah, it's a dreadful bit of prose, dry and mysterious as a bureaucrat's boner. Rather than rewrite it today, I have put in a link to a related and slightly less mysterious article.

Jim.henderson 17:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Merger
I propose to bring all the material from the Class 5 telephone switches article into this Office Classification article. Actually, very little of this article will remain alive; essentially the Class 5 article will be moved here and expanded with a few bits from this one integrated into it. Luis F Gonzalez will presumably want to contribute heavily to the Class 4 section, and I will add a few bits to classes 1, 2 and 3. I'll do the move a week or two from now if some people say yes and none say no. If all are silent, I'll wait until the beginning of December. If some think it's a bad idea, then let's talk about it. Jim.henderson 07:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I would have no objection to streamlining the various articles into one location, but this title makes no sense. "Office classification"?  That doesn't begin to explain that the article is about telephony.  I hear people in real estate referring to "Class A office space", and the poor reader of this article might have been looking for that information instead.  Perhaps "Telephone exchange" or "Telephone office" or "Central office" would be better article titles.    Mmccalpin 19:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Problem is, all the above names are already taken. Indeed, all are taken by one article.  It is possible to sieze control of one of those names and leave the others as they are, but perhaps something more specific would apply.  For example, the Direct Distance Dialing article is mostly about New York's conversion.  I could move that material to my New York Telephone article, leaving a stub DDD article.  Then, a few weeks from now, beef up DDD by merging this one into it, and the Class 5 article, and my Automatic Message Accounting and any others that are mainly about aspects of the creation of DDD in the 1950s and 60s.  It still won't become an excessively large and discursive article like Telephone exchange is today.  Anybody agree?  Disagree?  Propose a variation in grand plan or in detail?
 * Jim.henderson 01:16, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I do not think this article needs to survive. It's contents fit in with the current contents of the Class 5 switch article. But there should be an overall article on the PSTN hierarchy. Luis F. Gonzalez 05:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Jim Henderson commenting from a non logged in computer. Yes, the proposal to merge both articles into PSTN has the minor disadvantage of leaving Automatic Message Accounting stranded, but it unifies several related topics under a more readily recognized title for which an extensively linked article already exists.  All righty; several hours from now, from a logged in computer I'll rewrite the Merger tags, unless someone objects in the meantime or does it before I do.  Office Classification, Class 5, and DDD can all go into PSTN, leaving redirect links for anyone who may be accustomed to the old titles.  Except of course the New York part of DDD should go into New York Telephone.  AT&T Long Lines is mostly about the TD microwave network, and needn't be modified except for a link to the new, large PSTN article.  Anybody like or dislike this scheme?

Count & list by classes
Someone left this on my personal talk page. This is a better place for it, pending integrating it into the article, whatever article this ends up being. I've done nothing about the merger for a couple months.

There were 10 Class One offices in the US (White Plains NY, Wayne PA, Pittsburgh PA, Norway IL [which wasn't a real place, but a rural crossroads a distance away from Chicago - case hardened office built in a cornfield to withstand nuclear attack], Rockdale GA, St Louis MO, Dallas TX, Denver CO, Sacramento CA, San Bernardino CA) plus two in Canada (Montréal PQ, Regina SK), about 50-75 Class 2 offices (depending on year), 150-175 class 3, etc. The hierarchy was one of the first things you learned when you went to work for AT&T Long Lines. It mostly had to do with route selection, and other than "final routes" there often wasn't a lot of difference between class one and two offices - most class 2's connected to each other, so relatively little traffic went all the way up and down the ladder. But there were clearly five active levels of office in the Long Lines (and GTE) toll system.

The international gateways (historically, Boston/Springfield MA, New York/White Plains NY, Miami/Jacksonville FL, and Oakland CA) weren't part of the switching class hierarchy. They dated back to the era when operators had to manually complete all calls, and specialized call handling and billing procedures were required. As the years went on, they lost their special places in the system, and most of the class one offices acquired direct international connections, at least to more common points, with the traditional gateways being reserved for manually handled problem calls and countries. Much of that change had to do with the introduction of TSPS software that would allow the local operator to properly handle and bill international calls. Jim.henderson 04:58, 11 January 2007 (UTC)