Teacher
•
15 Messages
Outbound Outlook SMTP access for non-att.net email account
New U-verse customer trying to use SMTP authenication to send email from my non ATT.net email account.
No issues with the att.net email acount using an encrypted connection.
Can I not make a port 25 connection to the non-att mail server?
Feedback appreciated.
Accepted Solution
Official Solution
SomeJoe7777
Expert
•
9.4K Messages
13 years ago
Your other provider who is providing that e-mail account should provide authenticated and optionally encrypted SMTP services on port 465 or 587, see their support for details.
0
geegecko
Teacher
•
15 Messages
13 years ago
Thanks for the reply. The other provider's SMTP service is alson listening on port 1025 and it is not blocked, at the moment...
Do you know of other ports that are filtered?
The tier 2 support tech I spoke to swore they were not blocking port 25. Said it was an Outlook problem and referred to Connectech. Yeah... right.
Thanks again for the response.
0
0
seanmcc
Teacher
•
12 Messages
13 years ago
When I set up my mail server on Uverse, I called support and requested port 25 be unblocked. That was about 6 mo's ago. It took a little convincing, but it was done. Took maybe 15 minutes of talking. Have things changed?
0
0
SomeJoe7777
Expert
•
9.4K Messages
13 years ago
0
0
ahz
Contributor
•
1 Message
12 years ago
That the way ATT makes money, huh? I spent half an hour explain and they tried to get me sign up for pay support!
0
0
whdw41a
Tutor
•
3 Messages
11 years ago
The fee is now 49.95 and has to be the biggest rip off. You pay good money to have ATT U-Verse service and then are told that they restrict your use of outbound mail unless you pay a fee for them to fix it. It took some digging to find this out but intitially they said it was a issue with Outlook, The real issue is they block port 25 - nothing to do woth outlook.
0
californiawatchdog
Contributor
•
2 Messages
11 years ago
yes - this is absolute fraud - please contact me [Edited to comply with Guidelines] In the case of everyone I have spoken to, they fraudulently say they support it, and then the attempt to extort $50 or $15 per month. This is clearly fraud. The second step is going after the claims of customers who spend multiple hours on the phno to get this information.
0
0
californiawatchdog
Contributor
•
2 Messages
11 years ago
it is clearly extortion[Edited to comply with Guidelines]
- the extorsion was at first $10, then $25, now $50 (actually, 49.95)
1
0