Share your ideas with us

FedEx has master tracking numbers which can have multiple tracking numbers under 1 tracking numbers. I'd like to be able to add a group of numbers to a group, or master number, and it should be collapsable so I can open it and look at all attached tracking numbers. 

As a user, I'd like the ability to pull in tracking numbers to my dashboard by parcel account number so that I can view all shipments assigned to a specific or multiple parcel accounts.   For example I have 10 parcel accounts (4 with DHL and 6 with FedEx). I'd like the ability to utilize the parcel account number(s) instead of the API to pull in tracking associated with my parcel accounts.

We are able to retrieve shipping rates for each carrier, but we would also like customs clearance fees and other charges available through each carrier’s API to be integrated via API as well. This is especially important for DDP shipments. Some information that can be retrieved through the carrier APIs cannot be retrieved through AfterShip, which means we would need to connect to each carrier’s API separately.

Items + return reasons are not clearly highlighted/shown as selected, during the Return Request flow on the RC portal.    Request: During the return flow more clearly define that an item/return resolution is selected. i.e. have text say “Selected” or have the box change colour when an item/resolution is selected beyond just the black box. 

Background On the Return Summary page, the Return Status section is commonly used to display shipping instructions that guide customers on how to return their items. As part of these instructions, customers are often required to include both their RMA ID and Order ID with the return shipment so that the warehouse and processing teams can identify and process the return correctly. Currently, the RMA ID is only displayed at the top of the page, and the Order ID is not prominently visible within the Return Status section. Requested Enhancement Add configurable fields within the Return Status section of the Return Summary page to display: * Order ID * RMA ID These fields should be displayed alongside the shipping instructions and return status details, making them easily accessible to customers while preparing and packaging their return shipment. We are open to any placement within the Return Summary page that provides clear visibility and easy access to these details. Business Use Case Our client specifically requested this enhancement because their return instructions ask customers to include the RMA ID and Order ID with the return package. Having these details displayed directly within the Return Status section would: * Improve visibility of important return information. * Reduce customer confusion when preparing returns. * Eliminate the need for customers to search for these details elsewhere on the page. * Help ensure return shipments contain the correct identification information. * Improve operational efficiency and reduce return processing delays. Expected Outcome Customers can quickly locate the required Order ID and RMA ID in the same section where they view their shipping instructions, resulting in a smoother and more user-friendly return experience. Thank you for considering this enhancement. We believe it would benefit merchants who require customers to include reference identifiers with returned packages and would improve the overall returns experience.

Show all packages to a us zip code

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 using the mobile App, currently shipments remain visible in the tracking list even after they have been delivered. Over time, this can make the main tracking screen feel cluttered, especially for users who receive a large number of packages. It would be very helpful to have an option to: - Archive delivered shipments manually, or - Automatically move delivered shipments to an archive after a certain period of time. This would allow users to keep their active tracking list clean and focused on packages that are still in transit, while still retaining access to past deliveries when needed.   Thank you,

The ability to see how much it cost per tracking label for the carrier, alongside all the other analytics would be beneficial to business operations.   Having “cost” as a piece of data collect and display in analytics will help us make larger business decisions when it comes to choice of carrier preferences to know which carrier is best to work with in the long run. I believe this feature will be great value add to Aftership as well!

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.