lonebandit
join:2001-12-01
Oak Creek, WI
|  Postfix or Sendmail and SMTP auth with ATT
I have racked my brain on this and cant figured it out.
I have Sendmail and Postfix using SMTP AUTH to an independent ISP for SMTP but would like to use what we have (since it's free) but can't auth to ATT. I have tried my main account login as well as some generated ones for testing and email will NOT go through.
It looks like I might have to 'verify' any email address I want to use someone via yahoo? - I have several domains and create aliases as needed and can't imagine someone has to do this for each and every address?
What am I missing here?
I would just like to send any email out my home server towards ATT and have them accept it provided I AUTH of course.
..I presume this must be possible?
-JD |
|
netboy34
join:2001-08-29
Kennesaw, GA
1 edit | You have to smart host to smtp.att.yahoo.com over SSL to port 465. It will not accept over port 25. Also make sure you are sending the whole e-mail address as the username. user@att.net/sbcglobal/bellsouth/etc. |
|
nwrickert
sand groper
Premium,MVM
join:2004-09-04
Geneva, IL
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to lonebandit
The at&t yahoo servers don't follow the standard for TLS. Instead, they use direct SSL on port 465. Sendmail can receive that, but cannot send it.
You can install stunnel, and do it that way. Sendmail would connect unencrypted on localhost, and stunnel would send that to port 465 at the yahoo server, using an encrypted tunnel.
--
AT&T dsl; Speedstream 5100b modem; Zyxel NBG334W router; openSuSE 11.0; firefox 3.0.14 |
|
x509v3
join:2004-11-11
Campbell, CA
1 edit | reply to lonebandit
I"m new to U-Verse and had the same problem. After reading many posts in the forums and other sites, I found a method that works for me. The only question i have is that I don't know how long this particular AT&T smtp server will be around. It doesn't seem to be one of the more common ones.
I'm using postfix 2.1.5 (old), but didn't want to compile and use stunnel.
in main.cf:
# Authenticated SMTP servers for Uverse
relayhost = smtpauth.sbcglobal.net:587
smtp_use_tls = no
smtp_sasl_auth_enable = yes
smtp_sasl_password_maps = hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
smtp_sasl_mechanism_filter = login
smtp_sasl_security_options = noanonymous
create /etc/postfix/sasl_passwd:
smtpauth.sbcglobal.net:587 myUVerseID@att.net:MyPassword
chmod 600 /etc/postfix/sasl_passwd && chown root:root /etc/postfix/sasl_password && postmap hash:/etc/postfix/sasl_passwd
&& postfix reload
Let me know if this does/doesn't work for you too.
Cheers,
bill |
|
lonebandit
join:2001-12-01
Oak Creek, WI
| said by x509v3  :# Authenticated SMTP servers for Uverse relayhost = smtpauth.sbcglobal.net:587 See...thats one of my concerns. I know about this 'server' but how long will it be out there? - And why cant we get the others to work?
I run both postfix and sendmail. Prolly one of 3 people around my area that have any clue about sendmail. Sendmail just cant do this out of the box, like postfix can...but I cannot get postfix to work with the PROPER SMTP servers we are supposed to use.
I believe i know part of the reason - any email you want to send out appears to have to be verified with the yahoo web mail. It -seems- that unless I add an alias email to my yahoo account, I cannot send outgoing email using just any 'from' address. That doesnt make sense to me, especially if I had tons of aliases and/or usernames....but its the closest I got to getting postfix to relay 1 message to the proper servers. What got me to that was I could always send email to people using postfix via ATT server as long as I only used my ATT email acct from address.
Since then, I have given up and just do direct end-to-end delivery. So far only 1 site has an issue with that. Craigslist - flags me as dynamic.
If someone figures this out it would be awesome. It is always pointless to call someone at U-Verse support....they never understand this.
-JD |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
 ·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit | smtpauth.sbcglobal.net has been around for a long long time. Just use that. I've been using it for years for the just this reason, and I suspect other businesses do too.
It -seems- that unless I add an alias email to my yahoo account, I cannot send outgoing email using just any 'from' address. That You can thank your friendly neighborhood spammers for this feature.
--
AT&T U-Hearse
Your funeral. Delivered.
|
|
btur389w
join:2009-09-22
| reply to lonebandit
said by lonebandit any email you want to send out appears to have to be verified with the yahoo web mail.
[bquote= djrobx :You can thank your friendly neighborhood spammers for this feature. yes, this is true, you must verify every address that you intend to use when sending FROM through our servers. this is a restriction placed by Yahoo!, not at&t.
In general, the methods you have described that work, are not supported, and at&t techsupport will be unable to assist you if you need help.
At&t does however offer a pay-for service called Connectech, and they will attempt to assist you in any issues you may incurr.
Please let us know if you have any other questions.
--
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to email us at uversecare@att.com.
Our goal is to provide you Excellent Customer Service. Hours: Tu-Sa 12-9 CST |
|
lonebandit
join:2001-12-01
Oak Creek, WI
| Yet another reason to find a different provider - or at least a different independent SMTP outbound provider....
If we are able to accurately SMTP-AUTH to our ISP, then our ISP should pass whatever email we send out, regardless of what the FROM says. I cant even send an email from home with my work email address as the RETURN/FROM, unless its listed within Yahoo.
This logic is as bad as people that screen incoming yahoo/gmail/aol and so on email and make sure the 'connecting' machine is one of their own...That does reduce spam, but also restricts a good deal of legit email.
If I am AUTH'd into the ISP and someone complains there is SPAM spewing from my machines, this would be a trivial traceback.
Oh well. 
-JD |
|
x509v3
join:2004-11-11
Campbell, CA
| I came to U-Verse from SpeakEasy. They had a pretty liberal policy so when I purchased a statically-assigned IP address, I was allowed to send SMTP traffic directly..and I didn't need to use their choke point. I suppose I could have configured my server to use SpeakEasy's normal SMTP authenticated gateway, but I never tried because they didn't require it.
If I could be allowed to "go direct" via UVerse I'd do that, but I haven't heard that this is an option -- even with a statically assigned block. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong -- that'd be the easiest option for us paying customers.
For now, I'm happy with the workaround I identified. I can source the messages that I need to. But in the back of my head I'm always going to be worried that the unspoken "policy" might change on that server and it'll get locked down/changed. I don't like the fact that AT&T servers expose my credentials in the clear ove the wire and/or don't support the more standard SMTP-TLS, but this is a minor nit in the grand scheme of things.
Cheers,
Bill |
|
lonebandit
join:2001-12-01
Oak Creek, WI
| They put a port 25 block on with any new accounts. Call support. They remove it, for any customer.
I am on basic residential and no longer have a port 25 block.
But some sites can still reject my mail.
When I was static with SBC, they gave me a static but in their infinite wisdom, assigned my static IP within a block of dynamic residential IPs.
Nice eh?
I hit many RBLs trying to send email out eventhough I was legit.
-JD |
|
x509v3
join:2004-11-11
Campbell, CA
| Thanks for the tip. Sam in AT&T Uverse customer support responded swiftly to my request to unblock port 25 and to my request to create a reverse DNS PTR record. Even SpeakEasy wouldn't create a PTR for me, I am pleasantly surprised that AT*T would do that!
This is fantastic since I've now found out that the smtpauth.sbcglobal.net MTA is somehow connected to a prodigy.net address block. Services like hotmail were blocking emails when I used that gateway, they were marked as being "spammy".
So I'm better off using direct SMTP access out of my server anyhow.
Thanks for the comments and help everyone!
bill |
|
SparkySarkan
@sbcglobal.net | Yup just called Uverse and had them remove the block on port 25. I then had to verify my email address with yahoo mail. After setting my SMTP protocol to smtp.att.yahoo.com it works!
Thanks |
|
