Share your ideas with us

I want to be able to show values and total value of anything that is currently in transit, out for delivery and delivered so i can manage my insurance process of total value out at a given time 

There's quite a few couriers where the 'View on Carrier Website' doesn't take you directly to the trracking page, and instead requires you to enter the tracking number.  These can be easily fixed by correcting the URL.   For example, for Cainiao the link takes you to; https://global.cainiao.com/   This needs correcting to; https://global.cainiao.com/newDetail.htm?mailNoList=   Please submit any further examples below.

As a business owner, I am seeking a system that can facilitate risk level scoring for each RMA (Return Merchandise Authorization) and enable my staff to input risk assessment findings based on actual RMA inspections. This system will enable us to assess risk levels effectively and respond accordingly. Moreover, the system will allow for the reporting of any detected fraud instances.   Implementing this system is crucial for mitigating fraud occurrences, as well as proactively preventing future fraudulent activities. Such measures are instrumental in safeguarding my business's profitability in the long term.

Currently, AfterShip's webhook outgoing IP list is only available on an HTML documentation page (https://www.aftership.com/docs/tracking/webhook/webhook-outgoing-ips). This makes it impossible to automate IP allowlist management in infrastructure-as-code (IaC) workflows.   Problem: Teams that use IP-based firewalls to secure their webhook endpoints must manually monitor the documentation page for any IP changes and update their firewall rules accordingly. If a change is missed, it can cause webhook delivery failures and broken integrations.   Request: Please publish the webhook outgoing IP list as a dedicated plain-text endpoint — similar to how Cloudflare publishes theirs at https://www.cloudflare.com/ips-v4 — where each IP is returned on a separate line.   This would allow teams to: * Fetch the IP list programmatically as part of their CI/CD or IaC pipelines * Keep firewall allowlists automatically in sync without manual intervention * Avoid service disruptions caused by missed IP changes This is a standard practice among major API providers and would significantly improve the developer experience for customers who manage network security programmatically.

1. What is the context?  * We are currently a Premium plan subscriber operating a high-volume merchant shipping 68% of our Canadian orders via GLS Canada. We are looking to utilize the Enhanced MPS Visibility feature to improve our customer experience.   * Currently, your documentation lists carriers like FedEx, UPS, and DHL as supported for MPS, but GLS Canada is excluded. When we contacted support, we were told this is due to "carrier limitations.   2. What issue do you want to address? We believe the "carrier limitation" rationale may be outdated or incorrect because AfterShip is already successfully pulling data for GLS child packages. * Evidence: On GLS Canada tracking number P97186751, AfterShip retrieves events for both Package 1 (Delivered Nov 21) and Package 2 (Delivered Nov 19). * The Problem: Because GLS Canada is not on your "Supported Carriers" list for MPS logic, your system aggregates these distinct events into a single "scrambled" timeline instead of separating them into tabs. * The Gap: The data exists in your system; the parsing logic to separate "Master" vs. "Child" is simply missing for this specific carrier. 3. What outcome do you expect? * We request that the product team add GLS Canada to the Enhanced MPS Visibility supported carrier list * We need the system to recognize the child packages it is already detecting and display them in separate tabs (Piece 1, Piece 2), just as it does for FedEx or UPS.   4. Who will benefit from your idea? * Merchants: This allows Canadian merchants to use your Enterprise MPS features for their dominant carrier, reducing support tickets regarding "confusing" status updates. * AfterShip: It improves the value of your Enterprise plan for the Canadian market by supporting the region's major logistics provider.

As a loyal Aftership customer, I am extremely disappointed to learn that integrating a new carrier requires an additional fee—a neither transparent nor customer-friendly policy. Carrier expansion should be a standard improvement to Aftership’s platform, not an extra cost passed onto paying customers. Why This Needs to Change: Improving Aftership Should Be Your Priority, Not an Upsell Adding new carriers benefits all Aftership users. Expanding carrier integrations should be part of Aftership’s ongoing development efforts, not a hidden fee imposed on individual customers. Hidden Costs Undermine Customer Trust Nowhere in Aftership’s pricing model is it clearly stated that carrier integration comes with additional fees. This lack of transparency frustrates users and creates an unexpected financial burden. Loyal Customers Deserve Better Customers who have trusted Aftership for their business operations should not have to pay extra to access a fundamental feature like carrier support. Proposed Solution: Aftership should eliminate extra fees for new carrier integrations and invest in expanding its platform instead of charging individual users. This would be part of its commitment to improving service for all customers. Clear, upfront disclosure of costs should be required if Aftership maintains this fee structure. If Aftership truly values its customers, this change must ensure a fair, transparent, and customer-centric experience.

When a warranty is approved, you can choose to include an label. In the “Warranty claim approved” email, there is no ability to account for this decision. We would need to add an ability to have wording around a label being included as well as a label not being included. Below is an example email we have now.   Two ways this could be addressed: 1. Split this notification into 2 notifications: “Warranty claim approved - with label” and “Warranty claim approved - no label”. 2. Add Flows to Warranties with Split functionality for generated labels.

Allow me to still refund if I choose even if the return request has expired. Now I have to recreate the return request making more work for me.

Hi AfterShip Community, Context: I run a small Shopify store (~50 orders/month) using AfterShip’s free plan to track shipments (USPS, UPS). While the free plan offers basic tracking (Web:10), there’s no way to analyze tracking page performance (e.g., visitor clicks, engagement) without upgrading to premium plans, which can be costly for small businesses (Web:18). Issue: Small merchants lack access to basic analytics on the free plan to understand how customers interact with tracking pages, limiting optimization efforts. Outcome: I propose a lightweight analytics dashboard in the free plan, showing metrics like tracking page visits and click-through rates (e.g., to return portals). This would help optimize post-purchase experiences without needing a paid plan. Beneficiaries: Small e-commerce businesses, startups, and solo entrepreneurs using the free plan would gain insights to improve customer engagement and retention. What do you think? Any similar needs or suggestions to refine this idea?

Requesting to provide an option for the end consumers to edit the review on the AfterShip tracking page after the product is being delivered.    Currently, the customers are able to leave the review but unable to edit them.