Block all unknow calls request

**voipinit** · 07-04-2012 05:21 PM

VOIPo,

If possible, could you add "unavailable" and/or "out of area" to the "block all unknown calls" CID filter?

Thanks in advance.

**ymhee_bcex** · 07-05-2012 02:10 AM

I am curious - what does "block all unknown calls" if it doesn't block unknown CIDs?

**biomesh** · 07-05-2012 07:47 AM

AFAIK, "block all unknown calls" covers calls marked "private" and calls without callerID information. If just the number is available - the call will still make it through though.

**voipinit** · 07-05-2012 11:08 AM

Block all unknown calls has a filter list (private, restricted and a few others). The particular call I'm referencing had a CID of "unavailable" and a number of "out of area" and rang thru with the option set to "block all unknown calls". Possibly if any data is in the number field, the call will ring thru, even though the number field has text only (i.e. "out of area").

**tritch** · 07-05-2012 01:20 PM

This Caller ID issue reminds me of this thread:
http://forums.voipo.com/showthread.p...-being-blocked

They are spoofing the CID number field with text instead of numbers. I believe the "block all unknown calls" only looks at the CNAM field not the CID field. It's a good suggestion that Voipo look at updating their blocking feature to include this type of spoofing. In the meantime, adding an inbound call route as noted in the thread above seems to be the only way to block these types of calls.

**voipinit** · 07-06-2012 12:29 PM

Thanks, I'll try adding the inbound call route of "unavialable". The call log showed the call from "asterisk" so I already added that. Yeah, it appears the VOIPo block is strictly looking at the CNAM field. Thanks for the tip.

**ymhee_bcex** · 07-06-2012 01:19 PM

I realize that some people take the task of avoiding the incoming calls very seriously. Others, apparently, take the job of preventing themselves or family members from making certain calls equally seriously. For example, the screen for outgoing call routes has three(!) options that will fail the call (blocked, busy signal, disconnected); and one that can be called "speed dial".

Anyway, I respect those who believe that VoIP is a way to minimize telephone conversations. However, for those of us that look at VoIP in an old-fashioned way - making it easier and cheaper to actually communicate with friends and family - can I ask to have one single option that removes all blocking / disabling / blacklisting / etc options. Then "outgoing call routing" will actually become "speed dial" - just like on my Aunt Millie's telephone from the 80s; and if I don't want to pick up the phone - I will try to succeed all by myself, maybe with just a single "send to voicemail" option.

I really hope that "coming in July" changes will cater to those of us who don't see the need to distinguish between "blacklist" and "busy signal" of incoming calls.

Thank you for allowing me to rant!

**burris** · 07-06-2012 02:07 PM

Originally Posted by ymhee_bcex

I realize that some people take the task of avoiding the incoming calls very seriously. Others, apparently, take the job of preventing themselves or family members from making certain calls equally seriously. For example, the screen for outgoing call routes has three(!) options that will fail the call (blocked, busy signal, disconnected); and one that can be called "speed dial".

Anyway, I respect those who believe that VoIP is a way to minimize telephone conversations. However, for those of us that look at VoIP in an old-fashioned way - making it easier and cheaper to actually communicate with friends and family - can I ask to have one single option that removes all blocking / disabling / blacklisting / etc options. Then "outgoing call routing" will actually become "speed dial" - just like on my Aunt Millie's telephone from the 80s; and if I don't want to pick up the phone - I will try to succeed all by myself, maybe with just a single "send to voicemail" option.

I really hope that "coming in July" changes will cater to those of us who don't see the need to distinguish between "blacklist" and "busy signal" of incoming calls.

Thank you for allowing me to rant!

I think there may be more to this.

Most important is what you are willing to pay.
Coming from the world of telecom, I am quite aware of how costing and least cost routing works. The reason that for example ATT's voip seemed to work so well is that they charged a huge price and as a result were able to route over the costliest routes going everywhere all the time, and they owned all the pipes anyway.

Tim has this very problem, as do all the other lower cost providers. The routes are not etched in stone. The costs change constantly and to remain in business and achieve a profit, he is constantly changing the routing dependent upon how well a selected route is working at the time. At the same time, he addresses a particular customer's problems by perhaps altering the route in a given area to make it work better.

I'm sure Tim could choose the top tier routes and do what ATT did and Vonage does....but, he would have to double his price. If people were willing to pay those prices, then it would be easy.

Having said all that, I've been with him since the beginning during the beta testing well before he turned up the service. I've also been with some other VOIP providers starting in 2005. Not one has worked as well as VOIPo...the service for me, with the exception of an occasional burp, usually caused by me, works flawlessly.

Thanks for listening..

**voipinit** · 07-06-2012 07:35 PM

^ x2

I became a Voip subscriber in 2000 and have used Vonage, SunRocket (now defunct), Packet8 and Viatalk. I have been with VOIPo since 01/2009 and will be staying with VOIPo. The service has worked almost flawlessly and is and has been a great value. It took me nine years to find a Voip carrier I could be happy with, and VOIPo is the one.