Leaving Gradwell

[news]

My annual contract with Gradwell expires at the end of the month and my
domain is due for renewal in about six weeks. As the legacy Gradwell
servers I am on will be switched off around the same time, I've decided
to move on.

I've asked my son to come around later this week to do this and said I
would pick out suggestions made over the last year or two for a new
home. But there are so many discussions that I can't get my head
straight.

I am a single user with a dormant web page and no complex needs other
than I want to continue using Turnpike. As such, I don't seem to fit the
profile of outfits like TSO and Portfast which deal with more
heavyweight users - and charge accordingly.

My son's job involves setting up this kind of thing for SMEs, so he
will have no problems juggling with the technicalities. But he has no
knowledge of Turnpike or whether it can cope. I have a feeling he will
try to get me off Turnpike or/and plug me into something like GoDaddy.

Is there anyone in a similar position who has moved and can offer
advice?

--
David Lawson

[John Hall]

In message <lGsbKjL6...@davidlawson.co.uk>, news
<ne...@davidlawson.co.uk> writes

I've CCed this to demon.ip.support.turnpike, where quite a few
knowledgeable TP users still hang out.

As you have your own domain, you're in a good position to set up email
forwarding to whatever email provider takes your fancy. Currently
Gradwell hosts my own domain, and I use Gradwell's email forwarding
service to forward all mail for jhall.co.uk to the free account that I
set up for myself with gmail. I also use gmail for my outgoing email.
Their mail service is surprisingly good, given what a pig's ear they
made of googlegroups, and it can handle POP3 downloads and SMTP uploads
as well as the web access that most people use. The one complication
with gmail - and many other modern email services - as far as TP is
concerned is that they require TLS encryption, which TP can't handle.
Fortunately there's an excellent piece of freeware called Stunnel that
can sit between gmail and TP to provide this.

For news, I use the excellent NIN, which is well worth the 10 euros a
year that it costs me.
--
John Hall
"Think wrongly if you please,
but in all cases think for yourself."
Doris Lessing

[Martin Liddle]

On 15/07/2017 20:38, news wrote:
>
> I am a single user with a dormant web page and no complex needs other
> than I want to continue using Turnpike. As such, I don't seem to fit the
> profile of outfits like TSO and Portfast which deal with more
> heavyweight users - and charge accordingly.
>

TSOHost offer a Lite package that gives 500MB of web space and 10 email
boxes for £14.99 a year. They support SMTP and POP3 so should be able
to make it work with Turnpike.

--
Martin Liddle, Tynemouth Computer Services
Staveley, Chesterfield, Derbyshire UK

[DaveG]

On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 22:32:50 +0100, Martin Liddle wrote:

> On 15/07/2017 20:38, news wrote:
>>
>> I am a single user with a dormant web page and no complex needs other
>> than I want to continue using Turnpike. As such, I don't seem to fit the
>> profile of outfits like TSO and Portfast which deal with more
>> heavyweight users - and charge accordingly.
>>
> TSOHost offer a Lite package that gives 500MB of web space and 10 email
> boxes for £14.99 a year. They support SMTP and POP3 so should be able
> to make it work with Turnpike.

Is there any chance that package will do $anyt...@domain.tld to a postmaster
or primary account mailbox too? That's something I use a lot and <G> really
don't seem to be interested in their hosting customers these days.

--
ad astra tabernamque

[Andy]

In message <AoR9cqGkToaZFwsR@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote
[]

>>I have a feeling he will try to get me off Turnpike or/and plug me
>>into something like GoDaddy.
>>

Is there a GoGrandDaddy? I qualify :)

[]

>The one complication with gmail - and many other modern email services
>- as far as TP is concerned is that they require TLS encryption, which
>TP can't handle. Fortunately there's an excellent piece of freeware
>called Stunnel that can sit between gmail and TP to provide this.
>

Is this the situation where an antivirus program also copes? Was it
Avast?
--
Andy Taylor [Editor & Treasurer, Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit www dot austrianphilately dot com>

[John Hall]

In message <asMHnmB6...@kitzbuhel.co.uk>, Andy
<an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> writes

>In message <AoR9cqGkToaZFwsR@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
><john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote
>[]
>>>I have a feeling he will try to get me off Turnpike or/and plug me
>>>into something like GoDaddy.
>>>
>Is there a GoGrandDaddy? I qualify :)
>
>[]
>>The one complication with gmail - and many other modern email services
>>- as far as TP is concerned is that they require TLS encryption, which

>>can't handle. Fortunately there's an excellent piece of freeware
>>called Stunnel that can sit between gmail and TP to provide this.
>>
>Is this the situation where an antivirus program also copes? Was it
>Avast?

Yes, I meant to mention that.

[Martin Liddle]

You can set up a forwarding rule of the form *@domain.tld to
another...@domain.tld which will act as a catch all for anything not
handled by other rules. I have rules to forward email addresses that
are known to get a lot of spam to a mail box with stricter spam
filtering settings. An account that forwards emails to one email
address to two different email addresses and a catch all forwarding rule.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

In message <AoR9cqGkToaZFwsR@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall

<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes:
>In message <lGsbKjL6...@davidlawson.co.uk>, news
><ne...@davidlawson.co.uk> writes

[]

>> I am a single user with a dormant web page and no complex needs
>>other than I want to continue using Turnpike. As such, I don't seem to
>>fit the profile of outfits like TSO and Portfast which deal with more
>>heavyweight users - and charge accordingly.

[]
I'm similar (other than that I didn't already have a domain other than
the .demon.co.uk one). When I finally switched (when Namesco/Inty did
the last bit of jerking me around), I went for Tsohost as recommended by
several here (DIST); I didn't think their fees (7 or 8 a year for the
registration, which I presume is more or less what they're charged by
the registration authority plus a tiny bit, and 15 a year for their
smallest package [which is bigger than I need]) were excessive -
certainly down in the noise.

I wasn't even bothered about having the webspace (though it's handy and
in theory will keep me out of the clutches of dropbox etc., though I've
not used it for that yet); I only really wanted an <anything>@domain
email address. Since the webspace comes with anyway, I took it - I even
used their "we will transfer your website for you" service, which went
fine. (It doesn't correct email links etc. on your pages of course.)

I could collect and send email direct from and through them - I did _I
think_ specifically check that it can be done without SSL or whatever it
is Turnpike can't do (though I know about stunnel); however, initially,
I just set up a universal forwarder with them that forwards all emails
to my current ISP, PlusNet, with whom Turnpike seems to work fine, and
since this worked, I've never changed it. (In theory doing it the
forwarding way has the advantage that it doesn't use up any of your
total allowance with them: they allocate you space that is used by both
your website and your mailbox. But since my website was the old Demon
sort [tiny - and I don't think I was even near that], what they allocate
- 500M for the smallest package I think - is far more than I'd need.
Doing it the forwarding way does also require PlusNet's servers to be
working too, but so far they have been.) To my (pleased) surprise, the
forwarded emails still have the original "To:" fields on them, so I can
carry on using (giving out) <anything>@mydomain, as I always have.

I found TSOHost to be helpful and to match my level of competence
(medium) in any queries (i. e. they didn't treat me like an idiot, but
did explain where necessary; the only disconcerting thing was that they
all had names which seemed to be Russian to me (-:! [Not a problem, just
disconcerting!]
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I hope you dream a pig.

[DaveG]

Thanks, I shall go have a more close look at their offerings.

--
ad astra tabernamque

[SilverE]

At 12:37:29 on Sun, 16 Jul 2017, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote

>In message <AoR9cqGkToaZFwsR@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes:
>>In message <lGsbKjL6...@davidlawson.co.uk>, news
>><ne...@davidlawson.co.uk> writes
>[]
>>> I am a single user with a dormant web page and no complex needs
>>>other than I want to continue using Turnpike. As such, I don't seem
>>>to fit the profile of outfits like TSO and Portfast which deal with
>>>more heavyweight users - and charge accordingly.
>[]
>I'm similar (other than that I didn't already have a domain other than
>the .demon.co.uk one). When I finally switched (when Namesco/Inty did
>the last bit of jerking me around), I went for Tsohost as recommended
>by several here (DIST); I didn't think their fees (7 or 8 a year for
>the registration, which I presume is more or less what they're charged
>by the registration authority plus a tiny bit, and 15 a year for their
>smallest package [which is bigger than I need]) were excessive -
>certainly down in the noise.
>

I use Namecheap with Plusnet, and only need to pay for registration
(about $8 for .com), as they give free mail forwarding. In fact they
give you DNS and forwarding completely free even if you don't host the
domain with them - convenient when moving from 123-reg who are now quite
expensive. Namecheap do offer their own mailbox for not very much extra
cost.

<>
>
>I could collect and send email direct from and through them - I did _I
>think_ specifically check that it can be done without SSL or whatever
>it is Turnpike can't do (though I know about stunnel); however,
>initially, I just set up a universal forwarder with them that forwards
>all emails to my current ISP, PlusNet, with whom Turnpike seems to work
>fine, and since this worked, I've never changed it. (In theory doing it
>the forwarding way has the advantage that it doesn't use up any of your
>total allowance with them: they allocate you space that is used by both
>your website and your mailbox.
>But since my website was the old Demon sort [tiny - and I don't think I
>was even near that], what they allocate - 500M for the smallest package
>I think - is far more than I'd need. Doing it the forwarding way does
>also require PlusNet's servers to be working too, but so far they have
>been.) To my (pleased) surprise, the forwarded emails still have the
>original "To:" fields on them, so I can carry on using (giving out)
><anything>@mydomain, as I always have.

Namecheap keep the To: header (it would be odd to change that), but the
SMTP envelope goes to a single address at Plusnet, so Turnpike's folder
and rejection rules need rewriting as Custom which is extra work.
Duplicate forwards are possible so priority email names go to
Outlook.com as well so that my phone can pick them up immediately over
an SSL link (don't use Plusnet over public wifi as it's not encrypted).

I have looked at Zoho which claims to rewrite (retaining the original
email name in SMTP) but it wasn't playing last time I tried. A while
back I was with Namesco (who inherited me from the original Gradwell)
and they did this, but they have dropped the function for new users.

>I found TSOHost to be helpful and to match my level of competence
>(medium) in any queries (i. e. they didn't treat me like an idiot, but
>did explain where necessary; the only disconcerting thing was that they
>all had names which seemed to be Russian to me (-:! [Not a problem,
>just disconcerting!]

Namecheap's people sound very similar - down to the Russian names.

--
SilverE

[John Hall]

In message <lGsbKjL6...@davidlawson.co.uk>, news
<ne...@davidlawson.co.uk> writes

>My annual contract with Gradwell expires at the end of the month and my
>domain is due for renewal in about six weeks. As the legacy Gradwell
>servers I am on will be switched off around the same time, I've decided
>to move on.

<snip>

I haven't yet heard anything about the legacy Gradwell servers being
switched off. Checking, I see that the domain hosting and email
forwarding that I get from Gradwell will be due for renewal at the end
of this month, so I suppose I will hear from them very soon, either with
an invoice for the next 12 months or the information that the legacy
services I'm using are being withdrawn. Checking on past emails from
Demon, the only thing I could find that was relevant was this, in an
email dated 19/08/2016 and with the subject "Changes to your hosting
services". After talking about migrating my account details to the
cloud, it says:

"Your data will remain on the same servers."

and

"We want to make this transition as smooth as possible for you so we
will handle the entire migration of your account details, domain names
and DNS records. There will be some changes to the functionality,
however. You will be able to perform basic tasks such as resetting a
user’s password or updating an email forwarding rule in the new
control panel but the overall functionality will be limited. That said,
now your account details and domains sit in the new platform, we will be
happy to assist you in moving to a new hosting package where you can
move your data on to the new platform and take advantage of all the new
features it has to offer."

This support article on Gradwell's website from two months ago says
nothing about the legacy servers being withdrawn:

https://support.gradwell.com/hc/en-gb/articles/215777383-Accessing-your-Legacy-Hosting-in-Gradwell-Cloud

So I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

[John Hall]

In message <F2zSolDY87aZFw8Y@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>I haven't yet heard anything about the legacy Gradwell servers being
>switched off.

Further hunting on Gradwell's website has turned up this:

https://support.gradwellcloud.com/hc/en-gb/articles/213884485-Cloud-Migration-FAQ-s

"When will the legacy platform be switched off and what will happen to
my data?

"We are committed to getting all of our customers fully migrated to the
Gradwell Cloud platform as soon as possible. The aim is to switch our
legacy platform off by the end of Q3 2017. We have worked very hard to
create an attractive proposition for existing customers to move to
Gradwell Cloud, and take advantage of the new features. As such, we are
encouraging customers to move to one of the new packages available as
soon as possible, and we will do our best to assist your transition.

"Your data will only be available until the final switch off of our
legacy platform, hence we encourage you to migrate as soon as possible.
We will give ample notice of the final switch off to any customers who
still hold information on the legacy platform ahead of the servers being
shut down."

So I suppose I should await the "ample notice".

[David Gibson]

On 16/07/2017 09:05, Andy wrote:

> The one complication with gmail - and many other modern email services -
> as far as TP is concerned is that they require TLS encryption, which TP
> can't handle. Fortunately there's an excellent piece of freeware called
> Stunnel that can sit between gmail and TP to provide this.

Yes, I had that difficulty with TLS.

Whilst Turnpike was my "friend" for many years, I decided to bite the
bullet and move to something that was - let's face it - more up-to-date
and easier to install on a new computer. I found it far simpler than I
thought to transfer my email database from TP to Thunderbird and, after
a long process of learning all Thunderbird's subtleties I have to say
that it works fine for me. In some respects, compare to TP-5, which I
was using, it is superior, e.g. searching, filtering etc.

My advice, should anyone want it :-), is to upgrade your mail reader
from Turnpike "at your leisure, but soon" rather than be forced into
doing it (like I was) when you have a computer crash! ...as you
inevitably will, at some point.

My only problem was that I used to rely heavily on having mailing lists
handled as newsgroups, which meant that Turnpike's data format for those
emails was "newsgroup format" and not "email format"; and so I could not
import them into Thunderbird. I could edit the file format. but Im
avoiding doing that until I actually need to.

--
David Gibson

[news]

In article <VA221MEPW8aZFwN5@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>we are encouraging customers to move to one of the new packages
>available as soon as possible, and we will do our best to assist your
>transition.

One reason I am moving after being with <G> through thin and thin for
well over 10 years is that I have no idea what the "new packages" are.
Has anyone found details?
--
David Lawson

[DaveG]

Not especially, since it was a long while ago I last looked, but the general
sense I got for their "cloud" offering is that the equivalent packages have
fewer features for more money. Either the economies of
"cloud" are not true or <g> are making more profit out of us.

Having said that, I got an email a little while back to tell me my migration
was complete and supplying a link to "my voice control panel". I had to
re-read it a couple of time to get it to register in my little brain because
I have no "voice" services at all with <g>. Closer inspection and a click on
the link revealed it to be the new cloud-based account control panel.

It seems <g> staff are so focused on their VIOP customers that they forget
how to talk to non-VIOP customers.

--
ad astra tabernamque

[Andy]

In message <jP_aB.6710$8M....@fx47.am4>, DaveG <nos...@nospam.net>
wrote
[]

>Having said that, I got an email a little while back to tell me my migration
>was complete and supplying a link to "my voice control panel". I had to
>re-read it a couple of time to get it to register in my little brain because
>I have no "voice" services at all with <g>. Closer inspection and a click on
>the link revealed it to be the new cloud-based account control panel.
>

So did I, but being voiceless decided to ignore it. I'd better have a
look!

[Andy]

In message <VA221MEPW8aZFwN5@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote
[]

>"We are committed to getting all of our customers fully migrated to the
>Gradwell Cloud platform as soon as possible. The aim is to switch our
>legacy platform off by the end of Q3 2017. We have worked very hard to
>create an attractive proposition for existing customers to move to
>Gradwell Cloud, and take advantage of the new features. As such, we are
>encouraging customers to move to one of the new packages available as
>soon as possible, and we will do our best to assist your transition.
>

I feel a bit like the proverbial duck sliding down a razor blade - it
doesn't hurt at present.

I recall a discussion on which if any flavours of php would work in
Gradwell's cloud - but I don't recall a conclusion. Does anyone? (I use
it to drive some forms on my site.)

>"Your data will only be available until the final switch off of our
>legacy platform, hence we encourage you to migrate as soon as possible.
>We will give ample notice of the final switch off to any customers who
>still hold information on the legacy platform ahead of the servers
>being shut down."
>

I have the "original" of my data on my machine here and regard Gradwell
as a "copy". Would anyone choose to not keep their own data?

[Martin Liddle]

On 16/07/2017 23:08, David Gibson wrote:
> My advice, should anyone want it :-), is to upgrade your mail reader
> from Turnpike "at your leisure, but soon" rather than be forced into
> doing it (like I was) when you have a computer crash! ...as you
> inevitably will, at some point.
>

I went through the same process some time ago and I would endorse your
advice.

> My only problem was that I used to rely heavily on having mailing lists
> handled as newsgroups, which meant that Turnpike's data format for those
> emails was "newsgroup format" and not "email format"; and so I could not
> import them into Thunderbird. I could edit the file format. but Im
> avoiding doing that until I actually need to.
>

That is odd. I have a 100,000 messages that were processed by Turnpike
as email to Newsgroup and I read them into Thunderbird (using the
ImportExport Tools addon) without any difficulty.

[John Hall]

In message <$ZKttmRiH$aZF...@davidlawson.co.uk>, news
<ne...@davidlawson.co.uk> writes

After some hunting, I have. I first looked under "Domain Hosting", which
offered three plans, the cheapest of which would allow you to have up to
50 domains when I only wanted one, and would cost £108 a year (probably
+ VAT). But then I found under "Website Hosting" that that included
hosting a single domain and was only £1.69 per month - so about £20 a
year (again probably + VAT). Email forwarding is hidden under "Email",
and is £2.63 pm, which looks like it's identical to the £35 per year (+
VAT) on the legacy system.

So having found that I can stay with Gradwell for little or no increase
in cost, I may take the line of least resistance and do that. I can also
move at a later date if necessary.

See:

https://www.gradwell.com/cloud/plans-pricing/

and click on the appropriate tabs.

[David Gibson]

I used ImportExport successfully with my Turnpike email exports, but not
with my newsgroup exports. Examination of the file showed a difference
in format - i.e. its not an MBOX file nor, it seems, any other format
that ImportExport recognises. It could just be that Im using
ImportExport incorrectly. Its Not important.

BTW - I suppose this is common knowledge, but it was new to me when a
friend explained it: Were I to be using Turnpike 6 (Im not; I was using
5) I could have got it to talk to Thunderbird directly, thus preserving
all mail tags during the transfer! Apparently, you simply set up TP6
as an IMAP server and then set Thunderbird to access it as an IMAP
client. Neat, I thought!

--
David Gibson

[Martin Liddle]

On 17/07/2017 11:54, David Gibson wrote:
>
> I used ImportExport successfully with my Turnpike email exports, but not
> with my newsgroup exports. Examination of the file showed a difference
> in format - i.e. its not an MBOX file nor, it seems, any other format
> that ImportExport recognises. It could just be that Im using
> ImportExport incorrectly. Its Not important.
>

Perhaps the difference is that I was exporting from Turnpike 6. It is
now several years since I made the change so too long ago to remember
detail but the messages I was dealing with were important and I think I
would have remembered if there was a problem. My overriding impression
of the whole process was how straightforward it was although it took a
while to find the most efficient ways to do things in Thunderbird and I
am still learning.

[David Gibson]

On 17/07/2017 12:52, Martin Liddle wrote:

> On 17/07/2017 11:54, David Gibson wrote:
>>
>> I used ImportExport successfully with my Turnpike email exports, but not
>> with my newsgroup exports. Examination of the file showed a difference
>> in format - i.e. its not an MBOX file nor, it seems, any other format
>> that ImportExport recognises. It could just be that Im using
>> ImportExport incorrectly. Its Not important.
>>
> Perhaps the difference is that I was exporting from Turnpike 6.

That may well be it.

> It is
> now several years since I made the change so too long ago to remember
> detail but the messages I was dealing with were important and I think I
> would have remembered if there was a problem. My overriding impression
> of the whole process was how straightforward it was although it took a
> while to find the most efficient ways to do things in Thunderbird and I
> am still learning.

Yes, it took me a while too - from cursing that TB didnt do what I
wanted, to realising that it actually did it better than TP, but via
some obscure menu item. I didnt want to give up on Turnpike but, having
done so, I now realise the benefits of using an app that is designed for
Windows 10 and not Windows 95 :-)


--
David Gibson

[news]

In article <okq58DE6oIbZFwAa@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>

>After some hunting, I have. I first looked under "Domain Hosting",
>which offered three plans, the cheapest of which would allow you to
>have up to 50 domains when I only wanted one, and would cost £108 a
>year (probably + VAT). But then I found under "Website Hosting" that
>that included hosting a single domain and was only £1.69 per month - so
>about £20 a year (again probably + VAT). Email forwarding is hidden
>under "Email", and is £2.63 pm, which looks like it's identical to the
>£35 per year (+ VAT) on the legacy system.
>
>So having found that I can stay with Gradwell for little or no increase
>in cost, I may take the line of least resistance and do that. I can
>also move at a later date if necessary.
>
>See:
>
>https://www.gradwell.com/cloud/plans-pricing/
>
>and click on the appropriate tabs.

Have you decided? You say you can move later but I see the terms are a
minimum of 12 months, unlike the old ones where you could cancel an
annual contract and get a refund.

It also does not seem to make clear that you get a single domain
hosting - only that it will provide mail forwarding. Is that the same
thing?

There is no webmail, which is not a big deal until you need to access
from another location/machine. It's not been a problem since the days
when <G> went into severe meltdown because of problems with TP, but is
useful insurance.

Most important, I can find no mention of SMTP in the mail section. Does
that rule out TP? And does it mean relaying is out [accessing via a
different machine]?

The cost appears lower than the £84 + VAT I pay, which includes spam
filtering, so it might be feasible to stay if these niggling doubts can
be cleared up. In the meantime I'm looking at TPHost, which is cheaper
again.

But my computer-geek son continues to worry about the limitations of TP
being locked to Port 25. He explained that I would not be able to use
mobile broadband. I don't do so currently, but may want to in future. I
have pointed him at messages here about STunnel which appears to
overcome this problem.
--
David Lawson

[John Hall]

In message <p0YMHjFi...@davidlawson.co.uk>, news
<ne...@davidlawson.co.uk> writes

>In article <okq58DE6oIbZFwAa@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>
>>After some hunting, I have. I first looked under "Domain Hosting",
>>which offered three plans, the cheapest of which would allow you to
>>have up to 50 domains when I only wanted one, and would cost £108 a
>>year (probably + VAT). But then I found under "Website Hosting" that
>>that included hosting a single domain and was only £1.69 per month -
>>so about £20 a year (again probably + VAT). Email forwarding is hidden
>>under "Email", and is £2.63 pm, which looks like it's identical to the
>>£35 per year (+ VAT) on the legacy system.
>>
>>So having found that I can stay with Gradwell for little or no
>>increase in cost, I may take the line of least resistance and do that.
>>I can also move at a later date if necessary.
>>
>>See:
>>
>>https://www.gradwell.com/cloud/plans-pricing/
>>
>>and click on the appropriate tabs.
>
>Have you decided? You say you can move later but I see the terms are a
>minimum of 12 months, unlike the old ones where you could cancel an
>annual contract and get a refund.

I must admit that I wasn't aware that refunds were possible under the
old system. Since that costs page gives all the prices on a monthly
basis, one would have expected that to mean that paying on a monthly
basis was possible. In any case I'm not really overly concerned if I'm
committed to paying for a year up-front, given the relatively small sums
involved.

>
> It also does not seem to make clear that you get a single domain
>hosting - only that it will provide mail forwarding. Is that the same
>thing?

They seem to be two separate things, as I described above, except that
of course you need to have a hosted domain before the mail forwarding
would be feasible. So the hosted domain with website + email forwarding
would come in at £55 per year + VAT.

>
> There is no webmail, which is not a big deal until you need to access
>from another location/machine. It's not been a problem since the days
>when <G> went into severe meltdown because of problems with TP, but is
>useful insurance.

Well Gmail - to which I'll be forwarding - provides webmail, so I don't
see that as a problem.

>
> Most important, I can find no mention of SMTP in the mail section.
>Does that rule out TP? And does it mean relaying is out [accessing via
>a different machine]?

All I want is the email forwarding aspect, as that's the only
email-related thing I currently use Gradwell for. Basically I currently
have my email forwarded done on the legacy system, and need to get it
set up on the new system, which I think after much hunting around my
Gradwell control panel I now know how to do. It's under Account > Buy
more services > Linux email hosting > email forwarding.

The other thing I need to do - but with a lower priority - is get my
website moved to the new system. The way to do that seems to be via
Hosted Domains, clicking on the name of the domain, and then on the Web
Hosting line click on Add Hosting. Although the costs info makes it
sound as though the domain is an adjunct of having the website, on the
control panel the way it's organised it looks as though it's the other
way around, and you're paying for the domain hosting with the website
being thrown in as a freebie.

>
> The cost appears lower than the £84 + VAT I pay, which includes spam
>filtering, so it might be feasible to stay if these niggling doubts can
>be cleared up.

If you don't actually want a mailbox at Gradwell or to post email via
them, then - depending on how much spam filtering would cost - then yes
it could be cheaper. (I find that Gmail does a very good job of spam
filtering, though with the occasional false positive that I have to look
out for.)

> In the meantime I'm looking at TPHost, which is cheaper again.
>
> But my computer-geek son continues to worry about the limitations of
>TP being locked to Port 25. He explained that I would not be able to
>use mobile broadband. I don't do so currently, but may want to in
>future. I have pointed him at messages here about STunnel which appears
>to overcome this problem.

Yes, I hadn't thought of using Stunnel purely for "port shifting", but I
have TP sending mail via port 25 and Stunnel switching it to port 465 as
required by Gmail, so it will certainly work.

[Martin Liddle]

On 20/07/2017 20:31, news wrote:
>
> But my computer-geek son continues to worry about the limitations of
> TP being locked to Port 25. He explained that I would not be able to use
> mobile broadband. I don't do so currently, but may want to in future. I
> have pointed him at messages here about STunnel which appears to
> overcome this problem.

You can change the SMTP port; Edit the Windows "services" file and
change the smtp port number.

[news]

In article <okr81l$anb$1...@dont-email.me>, Martin Liddle
<new...@tynecomp.co.uk> writes

>On 20/07/2017 20:31, news wrote:
>> But my computer-geek son continues to worry about the limitations
>>of TP being locked to Port 25. He explained that I would not be able
>>to use mobile broadband. I don't do so currently, but may want to in
>>future. I have pointed him at messages here about STunnel which
>>appears to overcome this problem.
>You can change the SMTP port; Edit the Windows "services" file and
>change the smtp port number.
>

My son showed me the Windows services file but said this would not work
[or would not be allowed] with some hosting services and via mobile
broadband. I will pass this on.
--
David Lawson

[Martin Liddle]

On 21/07/2017 11:43, news wrote:
>
> My son showed me the Windows services file but said this would not
> work [or would not be allowed] with some hosting services and via mobile
> broadband. I will pass this on.

It certainly works to change the SMTP port and is fine if you want to
send via a single provider. If you want to use multiple providers to
send then I agree it would be tedious to keep changing it.

[John Hall]

In message <bcsomIGRVRcZFwNB@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>All I want is the email forwarding aspect, as that's the only
>email-related thing I currently use Gradwell for. Basically I currently
>have my email forwarded done on the legacy system, and need to get it
>set up on the new system, which I think after much hunting around my
>Gradwell control panel I now know how to do. It's under Account > Buy
>more services > Linux email hosting > email forwarding.

I have now managed to get this set up - I think, as at the moment my
email forwarding on the legacy system is still running, so it's possible
that is doing the work! One thing I found that could be a show-stopper
for those who use a lot of different email addresses is that there
doesn't seem to be a wild-card facility for incoming mail, so you have
to set up the forwarding for each address individually. Fortunately I
use very few addresses, so it wasn't really a problem for me.

[John Hall]

In message <awBDq6AxWicZFweY@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall

<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>In message <bcsomIGRVRcZFwNB@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
><john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes
>>All I want is the email forwarding aspect, as that's the only
>>email-related thing I currently use Gradwell for. Basically I
>>currently have my email forwarded done on the legacy system, and need
>>to get it set up on the new system, which I think after much hunting
>>around my Gradwell control panel I now know how to do. It's under
>>Account > Buy more services > Linux email hosting > email forwarding.
>
>I have now managed to get this set up - I think, as at the moment my
>email forwarding on the legacy system is still running, so it's
>possible that is doing the work! One thing I found that could be a
>show-stopper for those who use a lot of different email addresses is
>that there doesn't seem to be a wild-card facility for incoming mail,
>so you have to set up the forwarding for each address individually.
>Fortunately I use very few addresses, so it wasn't really a problem for me.

And now I've done a silly thing. I cancelled the subscription for the
legacy email forwarding, as it was due for renewal in another week, and
I didn't want to finish up paying for the same service twice over.

Now I find that my domain is shown under "Enabled" as "No". And click
on View Details for my "new" email forwarding, it says "Selected domain
is not registered yet and it cannot be used for mail hosting. Please try
later." So I've emailed Support, but I don't suppose there'll be anyone
there to look at my email until Monday.

[John Hall]

In message <REwHAtFKS7cZFwNB@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>And now I've done a silly thing. I cancelled the subscription for the
>legacy email forwarding, as it was due for renewal in another week, and
>I didn't want to finish up paying for the same service twice over.
>
>Now I find that my domain is shown under "Enabled" as "No". And click
>on View Details for my "new" email forwarding, it says "Selected domain
>is not registered yet and it cannot be used for mail hosting. Please
>try later." So I've emailed Support, but I don't suppose there'll be
>anyone there to look at my email until Monday.

I did them an injustice. When I checked on their website, I saw that
support was open for business from 9 till 5 on a Sunday, so I rang the
duty guy just after 9. He said he would see what he could do, but it
might need someone with admin privileges - which he didn't have - to fix
it.

I was out for most of the day, but he left me a message to say that they
would be looking at it on Monday. My control panel still shows the same
errors but - weirdly - within an hour of my phoning him my email
forwarding started working again, in spite of this!

[John Hall]

In message <bcsomIGRVRcZFwNB@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>In message <p0YMHjFi...@davidlawson.co.uk>, news
><ne...@davidlawson.co.uk> writes
>

<snip>

>>
>> It also does not seem to make clear that you get a single domain
>>hosting - only that it will provide mail forwarding. Is that the same
>>thing?
>
>They seem to be two separate things, as I described above, except that
>of course you need to have a hosted domain before the mail forwarding
>would be feasible. So the hosted domain with website + email forwarding
>would come in at £55 per year + VAT.

I've since discovered that on the cloud-based system, unlike on the
legacy system, email - including the option of email forwarding and
using a "catch-all" for that if you want - comes included with web
hosting, so there's no need to buy email forwarding separately. So for
me it's actually going to work out cheaper than before. (And even if I
hadn't wanted a website, the "web hosting" option would have been
cheaper than buying email forwarding separately!)

>
>>
>> There is no webmail, which is not a big deal until you need to access
>>from another location/machine. It's not been a problem since the days
>>when <G> went into severe meltdown because of problems with TP, but is
>>useful insurance.

<snip>

>>
>> Most important, I can find no mention of SMTP in the mail section.
>>Does that rule out TP? And does it mean relaying is out [accessing via
>>a different machine]?

It looks like the documentation is incomplete, then. When I login to my
cloud control panel, and click on Mail on the menu bar, it tells me
inter alia:

From here you can manage your E-mail configuration.
You can also find that Webmail services are available at
http://webmail.yourdomain.dom/
You can send outbound SMTP via SSL by ensuring your Email client is set
to use Port 587.

E-mail addresses like <mailname>@<all domains> will work for domain(s)
jhall.co.uk
POP3 Server pop3.gradwellcloud.com
IMAP Server imap.gradwellcloud.com
SMTP Server smtp.gradwellcloud.com
--
John Hall
"Three o'clock is always too late or too early
for anything you want to do."
Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980)