Google Contact Info no longer coming through for Caller ID info

[Ember1205]

I have a very long list of contacts stored in Google as I sync both my personal and work cell phones via that method so that I always have every possible phone number available on both phones. For a very long time, my OBI200 would correctly pass information about the contact through to my phone's "Caller ID" screen when they called my GV number. This is no longer working.

Example: I have John Doe stored as a contact in the Google Account that I use with GV (and that is connected to my OBI). The phone number is (212) 555-1212. If John calls my GV number, I no longer see "John Smith" but only (212) 555-1212 in the display on my phone. Looking at the call history directly in GV, I see the contact name shown.

Does anyone know why this behavior has changed?

My OBI device is directly connected to my GV account using SIP communication for inbound calls. It WAS connected via CallCentric call forwarding until they removed their free service a couple of months back. The Caller ID functionality seems to have changed independently of that configuration change, however.

Please note: I am NOT referring to anything to do with CNAM. Many of the numbers that I have stored are business numbers that I have overridden with personal names because I don't care that "Company X" is calling me - I care instead that "Person Y" is calling me. I've never had an issue with this in the past because GV has always overridden any specific Caller ID info and sent the stored contact information instead (which means that a CNAM query wouldn't be used or needed). Forwarding this info to CC in the past always ensured that the Contact Information is what was seen as well. So, this has nothing to do with executing a CNAM query and GV is already passing a name. Why is the OBI device not passing that through?

[drgeoff]

Regular readers of forum posts will have noticed many reports of GV/OBi issues over the last few months and few if any of them have been resolved.

My guess and I emphasis "guess" as I have no inside knowledge is that Google has been making and continues to make tweaks to GV which would require corresponding changes to OBi firmware.  Either details of the changes are not being communicated to Obihai or if they are they are not reaching the relevant OBi engineers or there are no longer any OBi engineers who have the technical competence to act on them or Obihai engineers who do have the competence are for some reason not doing so.

Additionally, though I have no evidence, it is difficult not to be tempted into thinking that the current "Obihai malaise" is connected with the Polycom acquisition of Obihai.  Which of the two might be cause and which be result is another question.

[Ember1205]

Thanks for the response.

I continued to dig and search after posting this and wonder if this is actually a purposeful change on the part of Obi/Polycom in an effort to increase revenues. The "Obi Extras" package claims to make this exact function available if I am will to subscribe to their $4.99/month service. While I can totally appreciate their interest in trying to drive revenue up, I absolutely do not understand this specific item.

GV will provide the Caller ID Name along with number to a Linked Number. This is exactly how information had previously been passed to CallCentric. When that number receives the information, it will skip executing a CNAM lookup since it already has the detail and will then forward that through to the device. For $1/month, I could re-establish my CC account and leverage the same exact functionality I had before. It would seem to me that Obi would stand more of a chance of selling the ObiExtras package if they actually did CNAM lookup for full Caller ID instead of "only" allowing the contacts information through.

[Taoman]

GV will provide the Caller ID Name along with number to a Linked Number. This is exactly how information had previously been passed to CallCentric. When that number receives the information, it will skip executing a CNAM lookup since it already has the detail and will then forward that through to the device. For $1/month, I could re-establish my CC account and leverage the same exact functionality I had before. It would seem to me that Obi would stand more of a chance of selling the ObiExtras package if they actually did CNAM lookup for full Caller ID instead of "only" allowing the contacts information through.

Not "exactly," as that's not the way it works with Callcentric. GV only forwards the number to Callcentric, not any other Google Contact information. Callcentric only does CNAM override if the incoming number matches a number in your Callcentric phone book, not in your Google Contacts. The only other way it might match is if the Google Contact is also in your telephone's phone book. Just tested this again and that is the way it works.

But that aside, I agree with your sentiments regarding OBiExtras. In my view, paying $1/month for a CC DID is well worth the cost for the CNAM, spam detection, and call treatment features.

I continued to dig and search after posting this and wonder if this is actually a purposeful change on the part of Obi/Polycom in an effort to increase revenues.

That's my guess also.

[Ember1205]

Good point on the CC Contacts / Phonebook. As I think back, it's likely that I exported my GV Contacts and imported it into CC when I set everything up and then did ongoing management over time...

Still........

I would be more than happy to do that and spend $1/month for full CNAM than $5/month to "only" get my GV contacts.

[Taoman]

Regular readers of forum posts will have noticed many reports of GV/OBi issues over the last few months and few if any of them have been resolved.

I posted this on another forum.

At Cloud Next 2018, Google announced Google Voice for G Suite would expand its telephony offerings for business customers. Google's head of G Suite communication products shared today that the enterprise service will be available internationally once it exits beta.

The lack of wider consumer availability is unfortunate, but Google Voice right now is very much focused on the enterprise to capture the Cloud Telephony market. In fact, the consumer Voice team was merged with the enterprise team, while only offering an enterprise product in one country would greatly restrict the available market.

https://9to5google.com/2019/01/25/google-voice-g-suite-international/

The main focus of both Google and "Poly" (Plantronics/Polycom/Obihai) vis-a-vis Google Voice is the enterprise. SteveInWA has mentioned this before more than once. Consequently, the consumer side of things gets a correspondingly smaller amount of attention.

[SteveInWA]

The main focus of both Google and "Poly" (Plantronics/Polycom/Obihai) vis-a-vis Google Voice is the enterprise. SteveInWA has mentioned this before more than once. Consequently, the consumer side of things gets a correspondingly smaller amount of attention.

Yes, the enterprise (G Suite) Google Voice is consuming much of the dev/eng team's time, as it should, since the revenue from the G Suite offering is supporting the major overhaul of the service, which also benefits consumer users.  Both offerings use the same infrastructure, so improvements and fixes to one benefit the other.  The one area that gets less attention is anything related to the legacy PSTN vs. VoIP, since the enterprise offering is VoIP-focused.

One piece of good news is that the team is devoting resources to the mobile apps, with frequent releases to fix bugs as they appear (vs. waiting for some long period of time for cyclical releases).  One example of this is a Bluetooth-related bug in the Android app, for which a fix will be pushed out shortly.

Also of note:  Poly's VVX IP phone product line is the first series of IP phones to be qualified for use with the Google Voice for G Suite offering, and the two companies worked together to develop the provisioning and management system to accomplish this.

Optimistically, I believe that, over time, the overall service will stabilize and improve, since Google needs to offer "carrier-class" service to be able to sell it.

[lrosenman]

I'd have to go searching in this forum, but I made a post on the exact date that the info stopped coming.

As SteveInWA says, nothing we can do at the moment, but wait.

[Ember1205]

The question that I have is "what's the problem?"

Is this an issue of Google not sending the information or an issue of the Obi device blocking it?

If it's the latter, how do I downgrade my firmware to a version that doesn't block it?

[lrosenman]

Google stopped sending it.

You can't fix it from the client end.

[Taoman]

Interestingly, I spoofed a Walmart number and called my GV number.
My OBi just showed the number.
My Android when using GV app with "carrier only" setting showed city and number.

When I switched my GV app to "Prefer Wi-fi and mobile data" it displayed "Walmart" in addition to the number.
And I definitely do not have Walmart as a Contact on my phone or at Google.

I then tried several other businesses and every time the business name was displayed correctly when using the GV app set to "Prefer Wi-fi and mobile data."

What does that tell you?

[Ember1205]

I've read that a downgrade of the Obi firmware restores the functionality as well and that's actually why I asked about it. I would be interested in seeing something more definitive from Google directly if they actually did change their method.