It is now official - The iNUM initiative is dead

[JaskHill]

Received the following note from VOIP.ms.  Feeling very sad.  What is the reason that prompted ITU to make this decision?


==================================================
Dear ......,

We wanted to let you know that the upstream carrier supporting the iNum initiative has unfortunately started carrying out decommissioning work on iNums.

While the iNum service will no longer work with the great majority of VoIP providers, including VoIP.ms, the upstream carrier advised that the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) can still provide working numbers.

We apologize for the inconvenience this may cause.

Sincerely,

Best regards,
VoIP.ms Team
==================================================

[Taoman]

Received the following note from VOIP.ms.  Feeling very sad.  What is the reason that prompted ITU to make this decision?

The ITU had nothing to do with this other than allocating some of the non-geographic code (+883) for iNum use. Voxbone started iNum back in 2008 and housed and maintained all the servers (sip.inum.net). This is the stated reason Voxbone is getting out of the iNum initiative:

The problem that emerged was that while many network providers supported routing iNum calls, many more did not. And of those providers that did adopt the codes to route those calls, lots of them applied surcharges to the traffic. This negated the main value of the project.
This means that iNum didn't ever see widespread adoption, and its uptake was limited to very specific use-cases.
Because of the proliferation of virtual numbering in recent years, we've reached a point at which the initiative is largely redundant. But it requires lots of maintenance and resource to continue supporting. That's why, as of Q2 2020, Voxbone has made the decision to transition support for iNum to its natural home: the International Telecommunication Union.

We'll have to wait to see if the ITU does anything with iNum or just lets it die. In the meantime, I suggest getting a VoIP.ms virtual DID which is what I have done. It works much better and is far more reliable than iNum ever was. It costs $.25/month and incoming calls are $0.001/minute. Doesn't get much cheaper than that.

https://wiki.voip.ms/article/Order_a_DID_Number#Ordering_Virtual_Numbers

More info here:
https://www.dslreports.com/forum/r32742549-Voxbone-decommissions-iNum

[vtsnaab]

Does it work to forward from GV to a Virtual SIP number ??
(I have a SIP phone sitting idle...)

[Taoman]

Does it work to forward from GV to a Virtual SIP number ??
(I have a SIP phone sitting idle...)

No. What I did was get a free DID from IPComms (which allows forwarding to SIP URI). So I forward from GV to IPComms which forwards to VoIP.ms Virtual DID. Works great with no detectable latency.

IPComms only gives out so many free DIDs per week/month and it looks like right now they aren't available. But if you want one keep checking back you should be able to get one.

[AlexS]

Does it work to forward from GV to a Virtual SIP number ??
(I have a SIP phone sitting idle...)

No. What I did was get a free DID from IPComms (which allows forwarding to SIP URI). So I forward from GV to IPComms which forwards to VoIP.ms Virtual DID. Works great with no detectable latency.

IPComms only gives out so many free DIDs per week/month and it looks like right now they aren't available. But if you want one keep checking back you should be able to get one.

I may be misunderstanding, but previously I have forwarded my GV number directly to my voip.ms DID number without any problems. I stopped doing it after I switched to Google Fi, but it was working fine for me.

[Taoman]

I may be misunderstanding, but previously I have forwarded my GV number directly to my voip.ms DID number without any problems.

There is a vast difference between a PSTN DID and a virtual DID that only supports SIP URI calls.

[liamsmith]

Does it work to forward from GV to a Virtual SIP number ??
(I have a SIP phone sitting idle...)
foodle

While both types of phone numbers allow incoming calls, a PSTN DID is associated with a physical location and is used for voice communication over traditional phone lines, whereas a virtual DID that only supports SIP URI calls is not associated with a physical location and is used for VoIP communication over the internet.

[Lavarock7]

May I be the first to say   SPAM^^^^^^^^