Share your ideas with us

Suggestion: Add Lazada Express (LEX MY / LEL) Support for Malaysia   Hi,   I would like to suggest adding Lazada Express (LEX MY / LEL) as a supported courier/carrier on your app and website.   Lazada Express is the official delivery courier used by Lazada in Malaysia, similar to how SPX Express / Shopee Express is the official courier for Shopee. Many Lazada shipments in Malaysia are handled by LEX, so having direct tracking support would be very useful for Malaysian users.   The official LEX Malaysia tracking website is: https://lex.com.my/   For testing purposes, you can use these example tracking numbers:   LXST191548638MY MYMPA257159996   I hope you can consider implementing Lazada Express (LEX MY / LEL) support soon. As Lazada is widely used in Malaysia, I believe many users would appreciate being able to add and track their LEX shipments directly through your app and website instead of having to visit the LEX website separately.   Thank you for considering this suggestion. I hope LEX MY support can be added in a future update!

We use this to ship to clients it would be nice if we could save clients within the system to send notifications to. 

Our warehouse needs to know how many returns were requested on a daily basis so they can plan their resources accordingly. but it is not an option for now. It would be nice if we could build our own reports and schedule it. 

Honestly, this would help us to ease our shoppers through possible delays proactively.

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 We believe the "carrier limitation" rationale may be outdated or incorrect because AfterShip is already successfully pulling data for GLS child packages.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.

The “Back” button on the RC portal is not obvious or prominent enough. It is too hard to find and blends into the page. 

Can we have a way to export the report of the notifications? So for example, I would love to be able to export the list of people who had bounced emails for our shipping notifications or even to export the list of folks who did not open the message. 

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.

Goal: To make it easier for customers to accurately select the correct item for return when using the return portal. Preconditions: The customer has placed an order containing multiple items, some of which may have similar or identical titles, colors, or sizes. The SKU numbers for the items exist in the system but are not currently displayed in the return portal. Trigger: The customer initiates a return and accesses the return portal to select the item(s) they wish to return. Basic Flow: The customer logs into the return portal. The portal displays the items from their order, including details such as title, color, size, and now the SKU number for each item. The customer uses the SKU number to cross-reference their order confirmation or invoice, ensuring they select the correct item for return. The customer completes the return process with confidence that the correct item has been selected. Postconditions: The customer successfully returns the correct item without confusion. The support team receives fewer inquiries about mismatched returns. Benefits: For Customers: Improved user experience by reducing confusion when selecting items for return. Greater confidence in completing returns independently. For the Business: Reduced customer support requests related to returns. Increased efficiency in processing returns, minimizing errors caused by incorrect item selection. Priority: Medium – This enhancement has a high potential to improve customer satisfaction with a relatively low implementation effort. Technical Requirements: Modify the front-end display of the return portal to include SKU numbers as part of the product details. Ensure the SKU numbers are fetched and displayed consistently across all customer orders. This use case focuses on enhancing the clarity of the return process for customers while streamlining operational efficiency for the business.

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.