From: "Carl Gehr" Received: from mxout3.mailhop.org ([63.208.196.167] verified) by 2rosenthals.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) with ESMTP id 439244 for os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:37:00 -0400 Received: from mxin1.mailhop.org ([63.208.196.175]) by mxout3.mailhop.org with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1GZuiq-000M9I-Gg for os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:36:44 -0400 Received: from mail-out1.fuse.net ([216.68.8.174] helo=smtp1.fuse.net) by mxin1.mailhop.org with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1GZuip-0006Uw-Tt for os2-wireless_users@2rosenthals.com; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:35:32 -0400 Received: from gx6.fuse.net ([208.102.7.45]) by smtp1.fuse.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20061017193526.PUEQ26726.smtp1.fuse.net@gx6.fuse.net> for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:35:26 -0400 Received: from localhost ([208.102.7.45]) by gx6.fuse.net (InterMail vG.1.02.00.02 201-2136-104-102-20041210) with ESMTP id <20061017193526.NTUM10743.gx6.fuse.net@localhost> for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:35:26 -0400 To: "OS/2 Wireless Users Mailing List" Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:35:22 -0400 (EDT) Reply-To: "Carl Gehr" Priority: Normal X-Mailer: PMMail 2.20.2382 for OS/2 Warp 4.5 In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [OS2Wireless]Re: Another weird motel situation Message-Id: <20061017193526.NTUM10743.gx6.fuse.net@localhost> X-Mail-Handler: MailHop by DynDNS X-Spam-Score: -2.6 (--) Jeffrey, I do use PMMail. But, the level I'm using has the option to specify a Port. Are you saying that the Port 25 that I have specified is automatically overridden if I check the 'requires authorization' box? The Help text does not indicate this is done. Carl On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 14:30:06 -0400, Jeffrey Race wrote: >i can't see what mail client you are using from the header Carl, >but pmmail uses port 587 if you click the authenticate option, and >it usually works except where (as for me on rcn) it fails, but that >is not att's problem as they are for sure listening, because i can >telnet to port 587 fine