Yes, you're right! Confirms my doubts had strong basis.

Sorry, I've accidentally created confusion there.

By the "BTYahoo link" I meant the one that stands out as such in this post.

My comments about that are valid.

I regret I hadn't looked at the link you gave earlier, as I assumed this one superceded it. Simply because it was posted later and looked so obvious.

The two procedures look similar enough for me to guess that something odd and undesirable is going on even with the client setup method you link to. Specifically the quote at the end about incoming mail from the third-party server coming in through the BTYahoo account. To me that implies that POP3 requests on the BT connection may also be doctored to collect mail from the third-party POP3 server and deliver to the BTYahoo Inbox.

Ah, I see! . But you replied to me and I was in the midst of discussing the link Can I still use an existing non-BT Yahoo! email account when I connect via BT Yahoo!? about SMTP Settings.

However, I read it that the link that you wot of is also addressing the issue of sending from "foreign" addys in email clients via SMTP, but instructing you to 1st verify them on BT Yahoo Webmail. Hence the refs to Error 553 and the footnotes about Outlook 2003. and from the fact that you don't get a list of "which email address to send from" in Webmail (just found they do)

You can't assume one referenced link supersedes another just cuz one post is later. They are both BT Yahoo links and are seemingly contradictory. In fact they only both make sense if the non-BT Yahoo a/c is set up in the email client with their Outgoing SMTP Server = BT's own port 25 one. Which was one of the alternatives you suggested at first. That still doesn't preclude the other alternative of using a non-BT Yahoo non-port 25 SMTP Server.

Edited by XRaySpeX (Sat 07-May-11 05:39:49)

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Specifically the quote at the end about incoming mail from the third-party server coming in through the BTYahoo account. To me that implies that POP3 requests on the BT connection may also be doctored to collect mail from the third-party POP3 server and deliver to the BTYahoo Inbox.

Many Webmails offer the facility of amgamating other, POP3'able. a/c's to themselves. And we know that most of those Webmails can be accessed by POP3 from your email client. So it's not surprising that BT also provides this feature.

Just had a look at Hotmail; it's logically equivalent to the BT method described in the BT link that you wot of.

On the Sending side Hotmail shows the From: as "[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]". I wonder if BT gives the game away similarly?

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Specifically the quote at the end about incoming mail from the third-party server coming in through the BTYahoo account. To me that implies that POP3 requests on the BT connection may also be doctored to collect mail from the third-party POP3 server and deliver to the BTYahoo Inbox.

Many Webmails offer the facility of amgamating other, POP3'able. a/c's to themselves. And we know that most of those Webmails can be accessed by POP3 from your email client. So it's not surprising that BT also provides this feature.

Just had a look at Hotmail; it's logically equivalent to the BT method described in the BT link that you wot of.

On the Sending side Hotmail shows the From: as "[email protected] on behalf of [email protected]". I wonder if BT gives the game away similarly?

Now that last paragraph eliminates the third-partyy SMTP authentication problem that has been puzzled over.

Assuming this BTYahoo method is doing the same as that hotmail system, then the BT SMTP server is what is actually sending the emails, the third-party SMTP server being ignored - just referenced wherever you found that. In the header perhaps?

So unless BT block several ports, in the way Tiscali used to (or was it Orange?), the simplest solution is to use an alternative port, and the next simplest just to accept using the BT Yahoo SMTP server and ensure the General tab email and return addresses are set to the third-party ones. As I described earlier.

What do you reckon?

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Assuming this BTYahoo method is doing the same as that hotmail system, then the BT SMTP server is what is actually sending the emails, the third-party SMTP server being ignored - just referenced wherever you found that. In the header perhaps?

Not ignored but not used. This is case of other ac usimg BTs own port25 SMTP.

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Assuming this BTYahoo method is doing the same as that hotmail system, then the BT SMTP server is what is actually sending the emails, the third-party SMTP server being ignored - just referenced wherever you found that. In the header perhaps?

Not ignored but not used. This is case of other ac usimg BTs own port25 SMTP.

Dodgy semantic interpretation there.

If I had said "Ignored for all ongoing transmission purposes" you would have had less opening for quibbling, but that phrasing would have been unnecessarily tortuous and pretentious.

Your alternative of "not used" has exactly the same miniscule fault. It is used to construct the reference in the header.

It is quite clear what was meant, as long as one doesn't ignore, as you seemed to do, the qualifying phrase "just referenced ...".

Sorry will address proper on return. Kindle not ideal for quibblig

How interesting!!!!!! I started this topic 5 pages ago, being quite worried whether I would be able to use Thunderbird to pick up non BT emails once my line was activated. I got totally confused with much of what was being said, so imagine my surprise when my line was activated about 30 minutes ago. (Incidentally, the BT Home Hub has not yet been delivered, due before 6.00pm, so I reconfigured my Netgear.) Once I was live I fired up Thunderird, & lo & behold it works without me having to do any tweaks. Who's a happy bunny then? Thanks guys for all the input.

Brian