dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
2280
Prof_Tech
join:2007-06-30
Quincy, IL

Prof_Tech

Member

[Anveo] Numerous unreachable numbers when using Anveo

I ported my number to Anveo some time ago and am not happy with the service at this point. I am experiencing a lot of situations where I dial a number usually in a nearby location and get "486 Busy Here". This has happened for a number 150 miles or so from here in another state but has happened numerous times with numbers just outside of my "local" calling area but in the same area code. I suspect this is because their "free" accounts get poor routing [even though they aren't really free]. I have emailed support about this and then opened a "free" ticket with no response. Am seriously considering routing my outbound calls through another service but Anveo has $20 of my money.
Mango
Use DMZ and you get a kick in the dick.
Premium Member
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net

Mango

Premium Member

said by Prof_Tech:

I have emailed support about this and then opened a "free" ticket with no response.

 
Hey anveo See Profile!

Why all the posts lately that say you don't respond to tickets? I think most of us have accepted the pay-for-support and limited-free-tickets model, but don't forget that you still have to actually answer them!

m.

Trimline
Premium Member
join:2004-10-24
Windermere, FL

Trimline to Prof_Tech

Premium Member

to Prof_Tech
said by Prof_Tech:

nearby location and get "486 Busy Here"

What area code and prefix are you dialing? I recall that Anveo blocks certain numbers as they cost more, not sure this is the cause, but it is worth a look.
Prof_Tech
join:2007-06-30
Quincy, IL

1 edit

Prof_Tech

Member

This is just about what I figure is happening. My complaint is that no where does it say "we only connect calls to certain numbers". If it had I would never have signed up with them.

*edited* I have switched my outbound to a provider that I already was set up with and planned to begin using in a year or so. To Anveo's credit, they refunded a chunk of my money right away.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1 to Prof_Tech

Premium Member

to Prof_Tech
said by Prof_Tech:

I ported my number to Anveo some time ago and am not happy with the service at this point. I am experiencing a lot of situations where I dial a number usually in a nearby location and get "486 Busy Here". This has happened for a number 150 miles or so from here in another state but has happened numerous times with numbers just outside of my "local" calling area but in the same area code.

Downstate Illinois, Missouri, especially Iowa---probably a lot of high-cost RLEC (rural local exchange carrier).

Anveo tried to address this some while back, by having a multi-tiered system. I think that started with 4 tiers, then went to 6 tiers, or maybe the other way around. In any event, there was a lot of controversy and it was shelved.

Calling to high-cost areas is a difficult situation when the provider is offering very low rates overall. People could debate this all day, and indeed have.

But you are quite correct---there needs to be notification, and Anveo should respond to tickets.
twinclouds
join:2010-06-12
San Diego, CA

twinclouds

Member

I was told one of the issues about MagicJack is that they don't let you call some areas because of high cost. I never heard about this before so I thought was isolated case. Now I realized Anveo is doing the same. What about the other VIOP providers? Do callcentric, Future 9, localphone, CWU, voip.ms, vestalink have the same policy? I hope not, but want to know in case I need to find a new voip service provider.
Mango
Use DMZ and you get a kick in the dick.
Premium Member
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net

Mango to Prof_Tech

Premium Member

to Prof_Tech
said by Prof_Tech:

To Anveo's credit, they refunded a chunk of my money right away.

Good to hear they responded; thanks for following up.

CherryPickin
@98.113.213.x

CherryPickin to twinclouds

Anon

to twinclouds
This is called "cherry-picking" in carrier world and is considered a highly amoral while hitting and destructing whole industry's food-chain.

One or some providers decide to show how good they are thus lowering their prices to to absolute minimum while saying "well, we don't originate or terminate calls to/from certain, minor areas" or blaming the situation at some "rural" or otherwise "expensive" carriers without considering that by doing so they're damaging their own business income source. These stories are all lies and providers who base{d} their business model on such practice are either already doomed or going to be.

It's a one thing when a provider pre-declares their rate-sheet like CWU - totally correct way of doing business while it's another wrong thing when a provider uses innocent retail (end user) customers' "understanding" that a plan or a rate includes the whole market (like US or Canada or both) thus infringing on other providers by "luring" customers from them by causing those customers to "believe" that they may "save" more with that other "cheaper" one.

As a result - whole [VoIP] industry loses a credit of trust thus allowing a few big ones to use the above as an argument in their ADs or double/triple packages and higher reliability and quality of service.
OzarkEdge
join:2014-02-23
USA

OzarkEdge

Member

said by CherryPickin :

This is called "cherry-picking" in carrier world and is considered a highly amoral while hitting and destructing whole industry's food-chain.

One or some providers decide to show how good they are thus lowering their prices to to absolute minimum while saying "well, we don't originate or terminate calls to/from certain, minor areas" or blaming the situation at some "rural" or otherwise "expensive" carriers without considering that by doing so they're damaging their own business income source. These stories are all lies and providers who base{d} their business model on such practice are either already doomed or going to be.

It's a one thing when a provider pre-declares their rate-sheet like CWU - totally correct way of doing business while it's another wrong thing when a provider uses innocent retail (end user) customers' "understanding" that a plan or a rate includes the whole market (like US or Canada or both) thus infringing on other providers by "luring" customers from them by causing those customers to "believe" that they may "save" more with that other "cheaper" one.

As a result - whole [VoIP] industry loses a credit of trust thus allowing a few big ones to use the above as an argument in their ADs or double/triple packages and higher reliability and quality of service.

Amen. And not peculiar to VoIP. This happens everywhere. Many quality goods are being marginalized out of existence by each subsequent generation of non-discriminating consumers. I understand the quest some undertake for the cheapest VoIP they can configure, but it may not be fair and sustainable trade. I prefer my partners to thrive and succeed.

OE
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1 to twinclouds

Premium Member

to twinclouds
said by twinclouds:

Do callcentric, Future 9, localphone, CWU, voip.ms, vestalink have the same policy? I hope not, but want to know in case I need to find a new voip service provider.

CallCentric absolutely does not, and AFAIK neither does Voip.MS or FutureNine. Not sure in some of the rest up or down.

As was said, CWU offers specific rate lookup and a variety of routes. CWU says "Rates to some USA and Canadian numbers might be higher, check the simulator to find the exact rate". So CWU is very upfront.

-----

This has been a known issue with MagicJack, there is a long thread in the MJ forum on this website about that.

It was even a problem with GoogleVoice. Of course GV said 1) Hey it's free! and 2) We're not a phone company!

AT&T says: Google Is So Evil, They Even Block Calls to Nuns
»gigaom.com/2009/10/14/at ··· th-nuns/

mackey
Premium Member
join:2007-08-20

mackey to Prof_Tech

Premium Member

to Prof_Tech
Do you "normally" get those 486 responses for those numbers or does it just randomly do it? I was having major problems yesterday with "486 Busy here" and "500 Internal server error" responses on outgoing calls, half of the incoming calls went right to voicemail, and 1-way audio on most of the calls which actually connected.

/M
twinclouds
join:2010-06-12
San Diego, CA

twinclouds to PX Eliezer1

Member

to PX Eliezer1
said by PX Eliezer1:

CallCentric absolutely does not, and AFAIK neither does Voip.MS or FutureNine. Not sure in some of the rest up or down.

That's good to know.
said by PX Eliezer1:

CWU offers specific rate lookup and a variety of routes.

I checked their rate table. It looks fine for me. Paying a little more is reasonable but blocking the calls is unacceptable.
Mango
Use DMZ and you get a kick in the dick.
Premium Member
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net

Mango

Premium Member

I agree with you. Unfortunately a few months ago when Anveo tried that, they got so much criticism that the reverted to their original rate plan which is how things are today. A shame - as many US destinations actually dropped to $0.005 if I remember correctly.
said by CherryPickin :

providers who base{d} their business model on such practice are either already doomed or going to be.

 
Well, hello there. Long time no talk!
nitzan
Premium Member
join:2008-02-27

nitzan to twinclouds

Premium Member

to twinclouds
said by twinclouds:

Do callcentric, Future 9, localphone, CWU, voip.ms, vestalink have the same policy?

Our policy is to allow the call - but charge for it about the same rate we are charged. Either way I don't think that would be an issue for you in CA- this only applies to very rural areas.
twinclouds
join:2010-06-12
San Diego, CA

twinclouds

Member

Thanks. Good to know. Sounds reasonable.

sammoats
Premium Member
join:2014-02-16
Winchester, VA

sammoats to CherryPickin

Premium Member

to CherryPickin
You are absolutely correct here. We have almost 2 million different rates for US numbers in our rate deck and every time we have tried to offer an average price this is exactly what happened. On average rate plans the usage would suddenly skew tword the expensive rates and on the broken out plans it would always be the cheapest destinations.
So CircleNet decided that we would make a certain percentage markup on each minute and provide pricing to our customers broken out exactly as it was presented to us.
I think this is the only fair way to do it, with any other way that we've looked at some customers will subsidize others customers usage. The hard part is explaining to the customers when asked why you can't just give then flat number like company X or Y does. I can say our average price does or does not beat a competitor but it still isn't easy to make apples to apples comparisons.

RobThompson
Caution - VoIP Challenged Alert
Premium Member
join:2012-02-14
J8G 0C9

RobThompson to Prof_Tech

Premium Member

to Prof_Tech
Click for full size
I asked Anveo and the above was their response.

It seems area code / rate centre access depends upon your 'Subscription' level.
PX Eliezer1
Premium Member
join:2013-03-10
Zubrowka USA

PX Eliezer1

Premium Member

I can't blame them especially on the Free package.

OTOH, I am surprised that even some Business Package customers would not necessarily have access to the whole US population.

Thanks for your research.
Prof_Tech
join:2007-06-30
Quincy, IL

Prof_Tech

Member

All quite interesting information. I finally did receive a message from Anveo that said I "could upgrade to a higher package" that the assumption is would receive coverage. Had they been up front and responsive [I started contacting them over a month ago about this] I might have upgraded. That said, CWU is still the best around that I've found for low price service. Why would I want to pay the higher price every month when in fact I only call the higher price numbers occasionally and talk for only a few minutes? CallCentric and CWU still have my two votes. Though they represent two different pricing models I have received good support from both.

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

morbo to PX Eliezer1

Member

to PX Eliezer1
said by PX Eliezer1:

OTOH, I am surprised that even some Business Package customers would not necessarily have access to the whole US population.

As someone that uses Anveo for businesses, that is very surprising.
Stewart
join:2005-07-13

3 recommendations

Stewart to Prof_Tech

Member

to Prof_Tech
Anveo, please listen up. There are several things wrong with this picture:

1. On an intentionally blocked call, don't return a 486, ever. The proper status code is 5xx. If the customer has a PBX or a 'smart' ATA such as OBi, it can automatically fail over to an alternate provider. If not, at least he'll hear an error tone or see an error message on his IP phone. With a 486, he gets a busy signal and will retry several times, needlessly running up his blood pressure, before giving up.

2. Before blocking a call, look up the LRN. Many rural numbers have been ported to mobiles and cost almost nothing to terminate.

3. Before blocking a call, look at the customer's calling pattern. If he is e.g. doing thousands of minutes to mobiles, let him have a have a one-hour monthly call to a "free" conference service that costs you, say, $0.015 to terminate.

4. Provide an option on the web portal to enable calling rural destinations at a rate of e.g. $0.03/min.
anveo
Premium Member
join:2010-02-08

2 recommendations

anveo

Premium Member

said by Stewart:

1. On an intentionally blocked call, don't return a 486, ever. The proper status code is 5xx. If the customer has a PBX or a 'smart' ATA such as OBi, it can automatically fail over to an alternate provider. If not, at least he'll hear an error tone or see an error message on his IP phone. With a 486, he gets a busy signal and will retry several times, needlessly running up his blood pressure, before giving up.

Users with PBX are likely using Anveo Direct service. As far as 5xx and OBi devices, we had that in the past and unfortunately OBI is playing 10 seconds audio message like 'the call has failed from service provider reason code 500'
said by Stewart:

2. Before blocking a call, look up the LRN. Many rural numbers have been ported to mobiles and cost almost nothing to terminate.

We do that already
said by Stewart:

3. Before blocking a call, look at the customer's calling pattern. If he is e.g. doing thousands of minutes to mobiles, let him have a have a one-hour monthly call to a "free" conference service that costs you, say, $0.015 to terminate.

$0.015 is not a problem and we do not even block calls at that rate. I agree about usage pattern based approach.
said by Stewart:

4. Provide an option on the web portal to enable calling rural destinations at a rate of e.g. $0.03/min.

We tried introducing tiered pricing model and there was uprising here at DSLR. Unfortunately with flat rate pricing model comes service abuse which might be addressed by your suggestion in item 3
Mango
Use DMZ and you get a kick in the dick.
Premium Member
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net

Mango

Premium Member

If the user has configured a trunk group, the OBi would not play that message. Not sure how many of your users that applies to.

cybersaga
join:2011-12-19
Selby, ON

3 recommendations

cybersaga to anveo

Member

to anveo
said by anveo:

said by Stewart:

4. Provide an option on the web portal to enable calling rural destinations at a rate of e.g. $0.03/min.

We tried introducing tiered pricing model and there was uprising here at DSLR. Unfortunately with flat rate pricing model comes service abuse which might be addressed by your suggestion in item 3

If I understand Stewart correctly, he's not disagreeing with your flat-rate model, nor encouraging a tiered model. He's suggesting an opt-in model for those rate centers that you currently block on your flat-rate model.

Basically, have some way to opt-in into those rate centers at a higher rate. So by default, those calls are blocked, unless they explicitly opt-in to the higher rates for those rate centers.

If you want to get really slick, you could, by default, play a recording when hitting those rate centers that says something like "Due to the higher costs of connecting this call, your call will be charged at a rate of x cents/min. Hang up now to avoid the charges, or stay on the line to connect the call". So everyone can call everywhere, but with no surprises. Then have an option on your site to disable those notifications for folks that may regularly call those areas.

mozerd
Light Will Pierce The Darkness
MVM
join:2004-04-23
Nepean, ON

mozerd

MVM

said by cybersaga:

by default, play a recording when hitting those rate centers that says something like "Due to the higher costs of connecting this call, your call will be charged at a rate of x cents/min. Hang up now to avoid the charges, or stay on the line to connect the call". So everyone can call everywhere, but with no surprises. Then have an option on your site to disable those notifications for folks that may regularly call those areas.

Your suggestion is what I call a very effective and fair solution. Great suggestion!
anveo
Premium Member
join:2010-02-08

anveo to cybersaga

Premium Member

to cybersaga
cybersaga, this is geat idea!
grand total
join:2005-10-26
Mississauga
·Fido
MikroTik RB750Gr3
MikroTik wAP AC
Panasonic KX-TGP500

grand total

Member

I think it would be better to make it a positive option rather than a negative option. So, something like press 1 to be connected rather than hangup to not be connected. Also, press 4 to learn more, if the user presses 4 a message plays explaining how to set the option to not hear the message again. You could even allow setting the option from the phone so that the user does not have to visit the website. Sounds like a call flow to me .
Prof_Tech
join:2007-06-30
Quincy, IL

Prof_Tech

Member

Both very slick suggestions, which I would concur with wholeheartedly. Since I am running an Obi device I have implemented a similar solution using a Voice Gateway and will continue using Anveo for the time being. I hope they can figure out a way to solve this ASAP.
JoeSchmoe007
Premium Member
join:2003-01-19
Brooklyn, NY

JoeSchmoe007 to anveo

Premium Member

to anveo
said by anveo:

cybersaga, this is geat idea!

Can you clarify about incoming calls to my Anveo number? Are any of those ever blocked?
Mango
Use DMZ and you get a kick in the dick.
Premium Member
join:2008-12-25
www.toao.net

Mango

Premium Member

No, incoming calls are never blocked for this reason. The only reason incoming calls should be blocked is if you blocked them using the call flow, or too many people call you at once and you've run out of channels.