| Unblocking Port 25 for ATT Uverse DSL service After spending about an hour with Technical Folks who said they cannot offer unblocking port 25 service, who referenced me to Customer support who did not answer, the going back to Disconnect service, I had to pay 49 dollars for paid support who wanted to know about my equipment. At first they said they could not do it, but after a couple of phone calls it was instantly unblocked.
So this is what it comes to another money grabbing scheme to unblock port 25 so that I can resume using other E-mail accounts. |
|
cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | I don't know what the current partyline is on removing the block, but you shouldn't have to pay to have it removed. Post in the direct forum and I'm sure someone would get it removed for you. Getting your $49 back now is likely a lost cause. |
|
Zoder
join:2002-04-16
Miami, FL | It was a PITA getting it unblocked when I got uverse in July but after a lot of transfers, I finally got somebody who could do it and it didn't cost my anything except my time. |
|
 maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | reply to Loyd B
Pretty much every hoster these days has an alternative port for SMTP services... I have 2 hosted domains, and I can use port 26 for the SMTP server.
This also makes it easy on my laptops: They are pre-configured to use port 26, and I have used them on ISP's in Canada, Europe, and all over the U.S., both at peoples homes and hotels.... and it always works.
I would have checked with your "other email accounts" if they offer a different port. Any hoster that is serious about doing business with the small, independent people that rely on a home DSL/Cable connection will have an alternative port available so you don't have to go through the hoops of unblocking the port with your ISP.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" |
|
| reply to Loyd B
If they are blocking ports, then they are not complying with Net Neutrality requirements, and are not offering an internet service.
To comply with truth in advertising, they should call their product something else, let's call it ATT Optional Linking, or AOL for short. |
|
| reply to Loyd B
I dont know if its the same for Uverse but for just DSL service, port 25 isnt block if you have a business account but is block for residential accounts. |
|
|
|
maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | reply to ohjoy
said by ohjoy :If they are blocking ports, then they are not complying with Net Neutrality requirements, and are not offering an internet service.
To comply with truth in advertising, they should call their product something else, let's call it ATT Optional Linking, or AOL for short.
The United States does not have Network Neutrality. It has been tried to be passed through congress a number of times, but House and Senate Republicans have blocked its passage every time. (And generally speaking, Republicans are usually more in favor of what companies want, where Democrats are usually more in favor of government regulation. Both have its advantages and disadvantages.)
In other words: In the United States a company can call its product whatever it wants, and it can restrict it however it likes.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_ne···d_States
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" |
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| reply to Loyd B
One other thing to keep in mind is that standard SMTP traffic on port 25 is generally unencrypted. If you're using port 25 to access your own mail server (as opposed to using it for server-to-server transport), you're probably sending your login credentials in plaintext. Port 587 is the standardized (RFC 6409) port for submitting emails to a server.
ISPs intercept port 25 traffic because it stops tons of spam and malware emails from compromised user PCs. I have no problem with an ISP opening it up for a user with a valid reason, but I also like the fact that it's blocked by default, since that results in getting less crap emailed to me. |
|
cramer
join:2007-04-10
Raleigh, NC
kudos:7 | Both 25 (SMTP) and 587 (MSP) are unencrypted until the application asks to switch ("STARTTLS"). 465 (SMTPS) is SSL from the initial connection -- it's also depreciated in favor of STARTTLS. |
|
