I have used Heart internet for my web site and email for several years. They regularly change email settings etc. with upgrades and changes in security and everything normally continues to work.
At the end of December 2024 they did another update and issued new credentials for logging on to the IMAP and SMTP.
Their settings work fine for the IMAP and sync of the account, but sending fails every time no matter what I do.
eM Client has 3 settings related to SSL/TLS.
(1) Use SSL/TLS if available
(2) Force use of SSL/TLS
(3) Use SSL/TLS on special port (legacy)
The IMAP is set up on port 993 using option 3 for the security - Use SSL/TLS on special port (legacy)
Where the problem is it does not matter which port be it 587 or 465 with either of these SSL/TLS settings the connection either fails or times out vis: not responding.
I have tried all combinations possible even those that I know should not work and there is no success at all. Heart internet have advised I should use:
Outgoing Mail Server(SMTP): mta.extendcp.co.uk
Outgoing Mail Server Port: 587 or 465
Outgoing Mail Server SSL: STARTTLS or SSL/TLS (587 with STARTTLS or 465 with SSL/TLS)
While support emails are ping ponging at the moment I am not getting any closer to solving the issue. I just wondered if anyone else have any tips. Their default setting should be port 587 and STARTTLS. Well we don’t have STARTTLS in eM Client so they suggested the above settings. I am not sure what the differences in all the TLS versions and encryptions are, but is there a setting missing in eM Client?? Who knows!!
As @Gary advised in another thread, the SMTP port and security policy are specific pairs, so should be one of the following:-
Port 587 = Force usage of SSL/TLS
Port 465 = Use SSL/TLS on special port (legacy)
Port 25 = Use SSL/TLS if available
If none of the above allow you to send, then “if your account requires you to type in a username and password to send mail”, then could be your outgoing username and password is not correct or possibly might need an eg: App Password instead of your normal email login password.
I can assure you the User name and password is correct.
I have had some frther communication from the provider and it is possible that an update to the SPF is still propagating. It could be tomorrow before it forks again, if that was the issue!
The supplier has confirmed the email client must support TLS 1.2 (or newer) and can use STARRTLS. SSLv2, SSLv3, TLS 1.0 and TLS 1.1 aren’t supported on our servers.
I believe eM Client complies with this requirement. Still waiting for things to come to life. . . .
The supplier has confirmed the email client must support TLS 1.2 (or newer) and can use STARRTLS.
Yes eM Client complies with all of that for many years. The TLS ver all depends on what OS you have. eg:-
If you are running the latest Windows 11 or newer Mac OS, the OS includes and supports those TLS 1.2 & TLS 1.3 protocols.
If you are running eg: Windows 7-10 “it doesn’t support TLS 1.3” so eM Client only uses up to TLS 1.2 with those older OS versions.
Apart from any server changes, sometimes also locally optionally installed programs running resident such as eg: Firewall / Security programs or optionally installed Antivirus programs or VPN’s can sometimes interfere unless specially configured to allow the mail client access.
So if you have anything like that installed other than what comes default with your OS, try completely disabling those to test incase of interference with the sending mail.
Warning symbol at the most of my 70 email addresses (emclient Longlife 15 licence, 9 used)
Suggest then as no settings are working and you have paid lifetime licenses, to go to the following VIP support page and login and lodge a support ticket who can then assist you further.
Also let support know your Win or Mac OS version & eM Client version.
If you have run out of your support time, you can extend that for another 12 months via the following webpage.
My problems have come to an end. eM Client is not the issue here, it was the way alias addresses were set up on the email server after they conducted the upgrade. It was resolved by engineers identifying an unknow requirement of the upgrade they were not aware of at the time.