Why Can't I Send EMail to Earthlink's New Authenticated SMTP Server using Eudora 4.3.2 ???
Sandra Day
Earthlink's new authenticated SMTP server using Eudora 4.3.2. Don't
know why. I would appreciate it if anybody can tell me the reason for
the problem. I continue to be able to receive email from their POP
server.
Up until last Thursday, I was sending email through Earthlink's
non-authenticated "mail.pipeline.com" server. It appears that they've
pulled the plug on that server and now tell me to use
"smtpauth.earthlink.net", which requires SMTP authentication.
It appears that either (a) Eudora 4.3.2 is incompatible with the login
requirements of Earthlink's SMTP server, OR (b) I'm missing something
in the setup process.
I have religiously followed Earthlink's instructions for authenticated
SMTP setup for Eudora 4.x (found at
http://kb.earthlink.net/case.asp?article=19293 and
http://kb.earthlink.net/case.asp?article=15385 ).
I use Eudora 4.3.2 running on Windows XP. I have another networked
Windows 98 computer, on which, for testing all this, I have also
installed Eudora versions 4.3.2, 6.2.1.2, 6.2.5.6, and 7.1.0.9 and
Outlook 2000. I CAN send email to Earthlink's new SMTP server from
Eudora 6.2 and 7.1 and Outlook 2000, but not from the 4.3.2 versions,
either on Win XP or Win 98.
Using 4.3.2 gives the following error message: "Connecting to the Mail
Server. . ., AUTH CRAM-MD5 [connection time] Error reading from
network. Cause: Connection closed by foreign host. (0)"
I am likewise unable to send email using Eudora 4.3.2 on a friend's
Windows ME computer, but can send using Outlook 2002.
Each of those Earthlink Knowledge Base articles would lead one to
believe that Eudora 4.x is capable of logging in to their SMTP server.
But, so far, I haven't found the secret.
I would prefer to keep version 4.3.2 if at all possible, rather than
upgrade.
Thanks in advance for any help you can give.
Sandra
Sandra Day
>On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:51:03 -0700, Sandra Day wrote:
>
>>Since last Thursday (5 days now) I am unable to SEND email to
>>Earthlink's new authenticated SMTP server using Eudora 4.3.2. Don't
>>know why. I would appreciate it if anybody can tell me the reason for
>>the problem. I continue to be able to receive email from their POP
>>server.
>
>>Using 4.3.2 gives the following error message: "Connecting to the Mail
>>Server. . ., AUTH CRAM-MD5 [connection time] Error reading from
>>network. Cause: Connection closed by foreign host. (0)"
>
>This page suggests a possible solution (which is to
>add 'SmtpAuthBanished=CRAM-MD5' to Eudora.ini).
>http://seclists.org/bugtraq/2000/Apr/0016.html
>
>Double-clicking on the following link in Agent should
>bring up a 'Change Option' window from Eudora. Click
>'OK', then close and restart Eudora.
>
><x-Eudora-option:SmtpAuthBanished=CRAM-MD5>
>
>I don't know if this will fix your problem, but it's
>worth a try.
>
>Erik
Thanks Erik. I saw that mentioned as a possible fix in the Eudori.ini
chapter of the User Guide and have already tried all the possible
combinations of
SmtpAuthBanished=CRAM-MD5
SmtpAuthBanished=LOGIN
SmtpAuthBanished=PLAIN
by direct insertion into Eudori.ini
Same result. Still can't send.
Thanks anyway though.
Sandra
John H Meyers
> I use Eudora 4.3.2 running on Windows XP. I have another networked
> Windows 98 computer, on which, for testing all this, I have also
> installed Eudora versions 4.3.2, 6.2.1.2, 6.2.5.6, and 7.1.0.9 and
> Outlook 2000. I CAN send email to Earthlink's new SMTP server from
> Eudora 6.2 and 7.1 and Outlook 2000, but not from the 4.3.2 versions,
> either on Win XP or Win 98.
>
> I am likewise unable to send email using Eudora 4.3.2 on a friend's
> Windows ME computer, but can send using Outlook 2002.
The following is from a Mac forum, but appears potentially related,
including a link to issues involving incorrect SMTP server behavior:
http://eudorabb.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=8640
In particular, as you may have done, it says:
"Make your User Name your entire email address
(NOT johndoe, but rather joh...@earthlink.net)"
But what happens in the case of "pipeline.com"?
If http://eudora.com/techsupport/kb/2354hq.html is correct,
it might also pay to "banish" the "plain" authentication type,
e.g., perhaps modify what Erik suggested to
<X-Eudora-Option:SmtpAuthBanished=CRAM-MD5,PLAIN>
(BTW, the default is to banish LOGIN,PLAIN leaving only CRAM-MD5)
> I would prefer to keep version 4.3.2 if at all possible,
> rather than upgrade.
FWIW, Qualcomm has offered a free "Paid" mode license for Eudora 5.2.1
(which avoids problems with Windows 98/ME)
http://www.eudora.com/techsupport/kb/2759hq.html
http://www.eudora.com/techsupport/kb/2350hq.html
--
Froggie the Gremlin
wrotd:
Sandra, I use that SMTP server via one of my PERSONALITIES in v6 and it
works just fine. I have nothing more that AUTHENTICATION REQUIRED set, and
the username for my POP login has to be the entire qualified email
address...
<somebody>@earthlink.net
It works just fine... no special setup.
---<ribbit>
Sandra Day
>
>Sorry to hear that.
>
>Another thing to try is enabling logging of all
>bytes sent and received in both 4.3 and one of
>the other versions that works with auth enabled,
>and see if you can spot the difference(s) in the
>logs.
>
>I notice that mail.pipeline.com is still reachable
>via telnet, port 25. Have you tried using it again
>since last Thursday, with your old settings?
>
>Good luck,
>Erik
I have tried mail.pipeline.com with the old settings, including port
25. The error message I get back, using 4.3.2, is "Authentication
Required" and I'm unable to discover any combination of passwords and
user names that allows me to send email.
But, haven't tried that with versions 6.2 or 7.1. Guess I could try
that and see what happens.
Thanks.
Sandra
Sandra Day
<jhme...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 13:51:03 -0500, Sandra Day wrote:
>
>> I use Eudora 4.3.2 running on Windows XP. I have another networked
>> Windows 98 computer, on which, for testing all this, I have also
>> installed Eudora versions 4.3.2, 6.2.1.2, 6.2.5.6, and 7.1.0.9 and
>> Outlook 2000. I CAN send email to Earthlink's new SMTP server from
>> Eudora 6.2 and 7.1 and Outlook 2000, but not from the 4.3.2 versions,
>> either on Win XP or Win 98.
>>
>> I am likewise unable to send email using Eudora 4.3.2 on a friend's
>> Windows ME computer, but can send using Outlook 2002.
>
>The following is from a Mac forum, but appears potentially related,
>including a link to issues involving incorrect SMTP server behavior:
>http://eudorabb.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=8640
>
>In particular, as you may have done, it says:
>"Make your User Name your entire email address
>(NOT johndoe, but rather joh...@earthlink.net)"
Yes, I have done that.
>But what happens in the case of "pipeline.com"?
That's another issue. Now I've got two different domains. One for POP
and one for SMTP. Not sure how that plays out.
>If http://eudora.com/techsupport/kb/2354hq.html is correct,
>it might also pay to "banish" the "plain" authentication type,
>e.g., perhaps modify what Erik suggested to
><X-Eudora-Option:SmtpAuthBanished=CRAM-MD5,PLAIN>
Have tried that too. Same result.
>(BTW, the default is to banish LOGIN,PLAIN leaving only CRAM-MD5)
>
>> I would prefer to keep version 4.3.2 if at all possible,
>> rather than upgrade.
>
>FWIW, Qualcomm has offered a free "Paid" mode license for Eudora 5.2.1
>(which avoids problems with Windows 98/ME)
>http://www.eudora.com/techsupport/kb/2759hq.html
>http://www.eudora.com/techsupport/kb/2350hq.html
I have paid licenses for 6.2 and 7.1. I'd rather not use them because
of the "bloat". They contain features I don't want or need.
Thanks to all.
Sandra
Sandra Day
Froggie,
Thanks. I have tested versions 6.2 and 7.1. Like you say, they work
just fine.
It's just that I'd prefer to stay with version 4.3.2 in order to avoid
the "bloat' of the later versions. They have features I neither want
nor need. What I'm looking for is either the missing setup piece or
the workaround so I can stay with 4.3.2, Maybe there isn't any. But
I'm looking.
Thanks.
Sandra
John H Meyers
>> But what happens in the case of "pipeline.com"?
> That's another issue. Now I've got two different domains.
> One for POP and one for SMTP. Not sure how that plays out.
If there are no additional personalities, then you have
only one "user name" which is being presented to
two different servers, for different logins --
to the POP server to collect new incoming mail,
and to the SMTP server to authorize sending outgoing mail.
If the SMTP server needs a different "user name" for authorization
than the POP server, this arrangement would not work for both functions
at the same time. However, this would be common to all versions of Eudora,
not that Versions 6 and 7 would work, while version 4.3 would not,
unless of course you have made different setups for different versions.
FWIW, the type of problem mentioned above is addressed in Eudora
using an "SMTP relay personality" -- a distinct personality
having its own "user name," which can be different from the user name
used for POP, and thus can authorize outgoing mail
using a different user name than for incoming mail.
In file "Eudora.ini" one could also be sure that
SMTPPort=587
is in the [Settings] section,
and in any other personality that might be used for sending mail.
Another "stab in the dark" might be to add
SMTPAuthRequired=1
As to "bloated" versions of Eudora, version 5.2.1 (for which
Qualcomm now provides a "Paid" mode license gratis) is still pretty slim
(although I don't recall seeing that you've tried it yet,
to see whether it overcomes the issue at hand).
Every version comes with its own "release notes"
(often covering some past versions as well),
and various bugs or problems are being addressed in each update,
so if this situation was in fact fixed somewhere along the line,
as the Mac article hinted, some later version than 4.3.2 might just work better.
Have you in fact either been using the same original email folder
with all the versions you've tested, or have you created new folders
(and set up brand new options) each time?
If the latter, perhaps try doing the same (brand new options) with 4.3.2,
and see whether any surprising success also turns up there.
Another drection that hasn't been tried might be to ask Earthlink
which of the authorization methods they really use,
and "ban" the other two -- that's one more angle not yet exhausted :)
Oh, and whether there is any SSL option (or, heaven forbid,
that it's actually required, because it's not in version 4.3.2)
Since you already know that Eudora version 6 would be fine
(and works with Win98/ME), it's already certain that you can solve this,
there remaining just a matter of deciding how much more to try,
or whether to accept any later version (which always brings
some other benefit, perhaps only apparent later on).
Good luck, and best wishes.
--
John H Meyers
> I have paid licenses for 6.2 and 7.1
Well, a license good for 7.1 is good for all 4.3 thru 7.1
(the month of purchase is simply compared with a required date
for the version being used, so any code works for all past versions,
as well as future versions up to a year after purchase).
> I'd rather not use them because of the "bloat".
> They contain features I don't want or need.
Well, my car's speedometer goes up to 120,
but I'm not looking for a Model T Ford,
just because I don't intend to go 120mph :)
There wasn't all that much increase in the size of installers,
until version 7 practically doubled it,
apparently mainly for adding the "ultra fast search" option from "x1";
aside from occupying a little disk space, however, these options
don't seem to start using other resources until actually used,
and email doesn't appear to suffer in efficiency from unused features.
The most serious problem I had with 7.1 was cured by turning "x1" off :)
("spamwatch" can also be disabled)
All the best.
--
The Answer
my own question. A paragraph in the 5.1 Release Notes says:
"Fixed bug where users with a login name that contains an @ sign
(i.e. "user@alternatedomain") did not get the correct login name when
doing SMTP authentication. The problem was that the code was looking
for the first @ sign rather than the last in an account name like
this: "user@alternatedomain@realdomain"."
Further testing has proven that, when doing SMTP authentication,
Eudora versions prior to 5.1 cannot properly handle a login name
containing an @ sign, causing any attempt to send email to fail.
The answer is: IF YOUR SMTP SERVER REQUIRES AUTHENTICATION BEFORE IT
WILL SEND YOUR EMAIL, AND IF YOUR LOGIN NAME CONTAINS AN @ SIGN, YOU
MUST UPGRADE TO AT LEAST EUDORA VERSION 5.1.
The Release Notes were found at:
http://www.eudora.com/download/eudora/windows/5.1/full_elec/RelNotes.txt
Sandra
On Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:51:03 -0700, Sandra Day
John H Meyers
it would appear that you have your choice of any later version of Eudora,
and hope you find some valuable features which make it worth upgrading
(by the way, even without using the "x1" search client,
searches got much better and faster anyway, in later versions).
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:09:27 -0500, Sandra wrote:
> A paragraph in the 5.1 Release Notes says:
>
> "Fixed bug where users with a login name that contains an @ sign
> (i.e. "user@alternatedomain") did not get the correct login name when
> doing SMTP authentication. The problem was that the code was looking
> for the first @ sign rather than the last in an account name like
> this: "user@alternatedomain@realdomain"."
>
> Further testing has proven that, when doing SMTP authentication,
> Eudora versions prior to 5.1 cannot properly handle a login name
> containing an @ sign, causing any attempt to send email to fail.
>
> The answer is: IF YOUR SMTP SERVER REQUIRES AUTHENTICATION BEFORE IT
> WILL SEND YOUR EMAIL, AND IF YOUR LOGIN NAME CONTAINS AN @ SIGN, YOU
> MUST UPGRADE TO AT LEAST EUDORA VERSION 5.1.
>
> The Release Notes were found at:
> http://www.eudora.com/download/eudora/windows/5.1/full_elec/RelNotes.txt
>
> Sandra
--
Roger Grady
>Upon reviewing the Release Notes to Eudora 5.1, I found the answer to
>my own question. A paragraph in the 5.1 Release Notes says:
>
>"Fixed bug where users with a login name that contains an @ sign
>(i.e. "user@alternatedomain") did not get the correct login name when
>doing SMTP authentication. The problem was that the code was looking
>for the first @ sign rather than the last in an account name like
>this: "user@alternatedomain@realdomain"."
>
>Further testing has proven that, when doing SMTP authentication,
>Eudora versions prior to 5.1 cannot properly handle a login name
>containing an @ sign, causing any attempt to send email to fail.
>
>The answer is: IF YOUR SMTP SERVER REQUIRES AUTHENTICATION BEFORE IT
>WILL SEND YOUR EMAIL, AND IF YOUR LOGIN NAME CONTAINS AN @ SIGN, YOU
>MUST UPGRADE TO AT LEAST EUDORA VERSION 5.1.
Sorry to not jump into this thread sooner but I don't read news every
day anymore. I had the same problem with SBC/Yahoo when I got my DSL
with them. Someone from this newsgroup suggested replacing the @ in
the username with a %. That way there's not two @ in the whole string,
and 4.3.2 works just fine. I'd still be using it but Yahoo is going to
SSL and there's no way for 4.3.2 to do that.
Roger Grady k9...@sbcglobal.qlfit.net
To reply by email, remove "qlfit." from address
John H Meyers
On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 21:43:57 -0500, Roger Grady wrote:
> I had the same problem with SBC/Yahoo when I got my DSL
> with them. Someone from this newsgroup suggested replacing the @ in
> the username with a %. That way there's not two @ in the whole string,
> and 4.3.2 works just fine. I'd still be using it but Yahoo is going to
> SSL and there's no way for 4.3.2 to do SSL.
This archived thread mentions the above "%" trick for SBCglobal:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.mail.eudora.ms-windows/browse_thread/thread/148b58fb8c017f0a
Replacing with a colon ":" has also been suggested at one time.
Eudora's own "Worldmail" server accepted "%" in a username:
http://www.eudora.com/techsupport/kb/1480hq.html
Acceptance of these forms may be server-dependent, assuming that
Eudora does not actually replace "%" and ":" with "@" while transmitting,
but it appears that some servers may have adapted themselves in this way,
for the sake of Eudora verson 3 clients, if they were written that long ago,
or by people who can still conceive of the potential problem,
and elect to accommodate it.
--