[VoiceOps] Difficulties sending calls to Magic Jack

Mon Nov 22 23:23:44 EST 2010

I'm going to go out on a limb here and take a guess on what is going on as
I have no ties to the company (other than a few clients who use MJ that are
asking me to port their #s to our VOIP platform). From what I've read so
far people calling their MJ # from a phone in the same area code seems to
work.

First off: I don't suspect that all of the carriers got together and
started changing things just to target MagicJack. That smells too much like
a cartel activity to me. If you've ever experienced getting BGP up and
running with more than one of the carriers at once you know they can't
coordinate (then again, maybe my engineering teams have never been any
good).

Speculation:

1) MJ charges a termination fee on inbound out of area calls that is more
than inbound local calls. 
2) In an effort to decrease costs (all around) the carriers are now
transporting more calls closer to the local termination point. This could
be via VOIP or some other method. This would then decrease the amount that
MJ is able to bill the carriers.
3) Seeing their profits shrink results in MJ starting to block calls that
are from outside the called area code that are handed off locally.

In any case I've been telling people for years that the service will fail
eventually. I'm a firm believer in, "If it sounds too good to be true... it
is."

-- 
Brandon Lehmann  CCNA, CCAI, CFOT, Security+, Net+, A+
BitRadius, LLC
510 Court St
Fremont, Ohio 43420
Email: brandon at bitradius.com
Web: http://www.bitradius.com
Phone: 567-255-3610x9500
Toll-Free: 888-608-7253x9500
Fax: 567-255-3611

On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:53:05 -0500, "Dawson, Robert"
<robert.dawson at mindshift.com> wrote:
> 99% sure it is the assigned number . . . one of the guys here picked one
> up to play with, trying to verify with him now.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Colin [mailto:zavoid at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 12:01 PM
> To: Dawson, Robert
> Cc: VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Difficulties sending calls to Magic Jack
> 
> I've got a good idea of what's going on. Quick question though since
I've
> only tested MagicTalk and not MagicJack.  When you make an outbound call
> what does the caller see as the callerID?  Is it actually the number
> assigned to you from them or is it a different number?
> 
> 
> 
> Colin
> 
> 
> On Nov 18, 2010, at 11:53 AM, Dawson, Robert wrote:
> 
>> A business model based on arbitrage is the only explanation for how MJ
>> can continue to provide services, just like the "free" conference call
>> providers. I mean, $20 doesn't cover a lot of call termination. Sounds
>> like some carriers have figured out a way to break that business model
>> while possibly staying within the letter of the law (maybe). We have
run
>> into similar issues with L3 failing to terminate calls to high
>> termination fee services due to "limited trunk capacity" or whatever
>> other reason they give.
>> 
>> The thing I don't get is that MJ offers numbers in metropolitan areas
as
>> well and there would be no termination fee paid on those calls, unless
>> they figured out some way to route all termination to a rural area?
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org 
>> [mailto:voiceops-bounces at voiceops.org] On Behalf Of Matt Yaklin
>> Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 2:56 PM
>> To: J. Oquendo
>> Cc: VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> Subject: Re: [VoiceOps] Difficulties sending calls to Magic Jack
>> 
>> 
>> My uneducated guess is that the message is being played by Magic Jack.
>> 
>> Some carriers must be messing with the info they are sending MJ for
>> their call data records or somehow dumping calls via creative routing?
>> 
>> MJ must count on the income from terminating calls to offset all the
>> outgoing calls? If it was enough incoming calls that were messed with
it
>> could really upset things for them?
>> 
>> Like I said.. just a guess.
>> 
>> m
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010, J. Oquendo wrote:
>> 
>>> On 11/17/2010 2:13 PM, anorexicpoodle wrote:
>>>      We are seeing this as well.
>>> 
>>>      On Wed, 2010-11-17 at 10:53 -0800, Nicholas Sten wrote:
>>>            Anyone else have insight or comments on this fiasco?
>>> 
>>>
http://www.examiner.com/christianity-culture-in-san-diego/is-magicjack-highjacking-your-calls-with-confusing-305-848-828
>>>            8-recording
>>> 
>>> 
>>> <marketing_shpeel>
>>> 
>>> ... business you are trying to reach is using magicJack.
>>> 
>>> </marketing_shpeel>
>>> 
>>> And if a business is relying on Magic Jack (long pause...) You get
what
>>> you pay for!
>>> 
>>> *ducks*
>>> 
>>> --
>>> 
>>> =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
>>> J. Oquendo
>>> SGFA, SGFE, C|EH, CNDA, CHFI, OSCP, CPT
>>> 
>>> "It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it. 
>>> If you think about that, you'll do things differently." - Warren 
>>> Buffett
>>> 
>>> 227C 5D35 7DCB 0893 95AA  4771 1DCE 1FD1 5CCD 6B5E 
>>> http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x5CCD6B5E
>>> 
>>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> VoiceOps mailing list
>> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> VoiceOps mailing list
> VoiceOps at voiceops.org
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops