Problem With Callcentric Incoming Caller ID

Started by BearJerCares, June 04, 2013, 08:39:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

sdb-

Well, google is obviously not setting the privacy attribute nor anything in that logfile.

google is simply calling a DID.  That does not pass a privacy attribute.  The provider of that DID is doing an analog to digital conversion and creating the metadata trace log record posted by CC.  That trace log simply shows that CC needs to look closer to the DID to discover why the privacy attribute has been set.

The only thing google could be doing is NOT passing the CID information to the DID (ala *67).  In which case why would CC need to be "stripping the CID information"?  There would be nothing to strip.

One interesting thing I see in that line is the "party=calling;id-type=subscriber".  That sounds like this record is calling party information, and further that CC is recognizing the calling party as a subscriber.  How would CC do that recognition except by receiving the caller id of the calling party?  I wonder if GV is passing a CID that CC recognizes as belonging to a subscriber, and CC is then recording that event and prepping for later filtering it out by setting the privacy setting.  Do you have GV set to use your GV number or the calling part as the CID?  Did you add your GV number to your CC account?

powaking

I asked CC to take a look at calls I received with caller ID intact from last week and this is their response.  Find it hard to believe but....

We do not have detailed SIP logs for the calls from last week, only from the last couple of days.

If you call your Free Phone Number directly you will see that your caller ID is sent without issue. We are not blocking caller Id's from Google Voice, they are sending us the privacy flag that we have shown you.

If you have any other questions please feel free to contact us at any time, thank you.

lhm.

Ponder this from DSL Reports today in their forum.


"reply to pagemen
I'm starting to think this is becoming more spread than just GV.

I just tried calling my NY DID using Anveo, and it comes through as anonymous.
I then tried calling my normal DID, and it works fine.




join:2000-03-21
reply to pagemen
I've started to notice this, too.

Calling my Callcentric free NY DID directly from Localphone I get an incoming CID of Anonymous.

Calling my GV# from Localphone (which is forwarded to Callcentric), I also get an incoming CID of Anonymous.

It wasn't always like this.
hey mods · actions · Today 6:38 am ·


tommyanon

@comcast.net
could be that there is a certain route that offers lower pricing that many providers have started using to call the callcentric DIDs and that particular route does not pass caller ID properly. if the callcentric DIDs have a higher than normal termination rate that could explain why several carriers start using the same problem route assuming that route offeres a lower than average termination charge.

it may even be intentional. i seem to remember reading several years ago about carriers stripping caller ID because they were terminating long distance calls as local to get around very high rural termination fees. if i recall this was related to some Iowa based conference calling services."

slowbiscuit

Quote from: gmercator on October 16, 2013, 10:07:51 PM
If anyone notices any other strange behaviors with the Free NY DID's, please let us know here.

Yeah I'm having one, GV to CC inbound calls to a free DID doesn't work half the time, and rings late the other half:

http://www.obitalk.com/forum/index.php?topic=6922.msg43663#msg43663

dircom

#24
Today I got a call thru my GV # which forwards to my CC DID

GV history shows the proper caller ID 203-xxx-xxx, but Callcentric and OBI show New York, NY 917-281-xxxx

The caller received the telemarketer msg press x to continue call, even though the 203-xxx-xxxx is listed in my CC phone book

most of the posts are complaining of the call showing up as anonymous.  How is this call showing up with the same area code as my free CC DID? 917-7xx-xxxx

edit, I am also getting some caller ID's that show up as GEOCONNECT LLC 917-281-xxxx

sdb-

It is probably a carrier generic number.  Perhaps supplied by the GV carrier to fake an intra-LATA or intra-State call.

I noticed that when my localphone account calls my IPKall DID I get a generic carrier CID.  Localphone cannot call my GV number.  But when I use my cell to call my GV number and it forwards to my IPKall DID then I get the proper CID.  A few weeks ago those tests all operated correctly and I haven't changed anything.

Studly

Are most people who have GV forwarded to a free NY Callcentric number still having problems with the incoming caller ID? I was considering getting a free NY Callcentric number, and forwarding my GV line to it, just to get incoming caller ID with name. I'm reconsidering now, unless the problem has been resolved.

lhm.


MikeHObi

Quote from: Studly on December 18, 2013, 05:13:52 PM
Are most people who have GV forwarded to a free NY Callcentric number still having problems with the incoming caller ID? I was considering getting a free NY Callcentric number, and forwarding my GV line to it, just to get incoming caller ID with name. I'm reconsidering now, unless the problem has been resolved.

Note, this isn't only a Callcentric issue.  Anveo also has issues with their cheap DID's.  This is really a google issue.
Obi202 user & Obi100 using Anveo and Callcentric.

sdb-

I saw problems a week or two ago with an IPKall DID as well.  Before and since then it has been working great.

Studly

Are people still having these Caller ID problems? 

lhm.


AlanB

I switched to a paid number for CallCentric and I've had no caller ID problems since then.  Of course free was better.

lhm.

#33
Since Jan. 7th, CID forwarded from GV to Callcentric (on free DID) has been accurate for me. YMMV

carl

At this point of time, only problems I have are with calls involving GV. All calls forwarded through Localphone DIS.s- both U.S. and overseas, show proper CLID, so do calls forwarded through TMO or Verizon and so do any direct calls through any half way reputable carrier.. There used to be a problem with Localphone but they fixed it.
There has been a lot of propaganda war against Callcentric for no good reason.
For my part. I am initiating ports from GV for my both DID's  before March 15th( most likely to Localphone) and will certainly never look back.

Studly

I just set up the free Callcentric DID and have GV forwarding to that. When I call my CC DID directly, it shows proper CNAM. But when I call my GV number, and it forwards to my CC DID, then Caller ID just shows the correct number but says "Out of area."

As long as GV is passing along the callers number, why doesn't CC display the proper CNAM? Is there a setting I need to change or is this the same caller ID problem that others are having?

carl

Quote from: Studly on April 24, 2014, 06:50:03 PM

As long as GV is passing along the callers number, why doesn't CC display the proper CNAM? Is there a setting I need to change or is this the same caller ID problem that others are having?

That has been re chewed over and over. Callcentric shows what Callcentric gets- from Google Voice usually garbage- either no caller ID or fake CLID.  It has something to do with the cheap providers GV uses to forward calls to CC's CLEC ( Telengy).
I consider forwarding of Google Voice NOT a good idea and have stopped doing that long time ago.

Studly

Quote from: Studly on April 24, 2014, 06:50:03 PM
I just set up the free Callcentric DID and have GV forwarding to that. When I call my CC DID directly, it shows proper CNAM. But when I call my GV number, and it forwards to my CC DID, then Caller ID just shows the correct number but says "Out of area."

As long as GV is passing along the callers number, why doesn't CC display the proper CNAM? Is there a setting I need to change or is this the same caller ID problem that others are having?

I figured out my problem ... I had GV forwarded to Google Chat too, so was getting the call from my GV line direct to the Obi and that's why CNAM wasn't showing. Once I unchecked that option, then GV forwarded properly to CC and the CNAM displayed properly.

SteveInWA

Quote from: carl on April 24, 2014, 07:18:19 PM
Quote from: Studly on April 24, 2014, 06:50:03 PM

As long as GV is passing along the callers number, why doesn't CC display the proper CNAM? Is there a setting I need to change or is this the same caller ID problem that others are having?

That has been re chewed over and over. Callcentric shows what Callcentric gets- from Google Voice usually garbage- either no caller ID or fake CLID.  It has something to do with the cheap providers GV uses to forward calls to CC's CLEC ( Telengy).
I consider forwarding of Google Voice NOT a good idea and have stopped doing that long time ago.

This issue was resolved several months ago; thus, your comments are no longer applicable.

BobTeatow

Seems to be working fine now.  I was using a DirtCheap DID, but whilst re-configuring my Obis in preparation for the demise of XMPP, I reinvestigated - and to my delight, I find that Callcentric "free" DIDs now properly receive correct CallerIds from Google voice.

IMO the most economical and powerful solution to XMPP being dropped is

GoogleVoice ==> Callcentric DID for inbound

and  LocalPhone.com (with my GV number "spoofed" as the callerid) ==> for outbound

LocalPhone offers outbound calls to the US for prices from $0.001 to $0.005 / minute, depending on your  subscription (or not) to a bundle of outbound minutes per month.  (I prepay $1.60 for 800 minutes)

For my purposes, this works out even cheaper than the plans OBIhai is promoting.