On 15/10/2015 19:04, walt wrote: > My ISP recently started offering imap email service in addition to > the pop3/smtp servers they've always had, so I decided to try it. > > I was surprised to see that they recommend using a different smtp > server name when setting up my mail client, and they even offer the > option of using port 587 instead of 465 if I prefer it. > > Why would I use a different smtp server if I'm now using imap? I use > smtp to send mail, and imap to read it, right? Why not use the same > smtp server in either case? > > (The different server names actually resolve to the same IP address, so > the distinction seems to be more theoretical than real, but the theory > is what puzzles me.)
Let me clue you in a little about what goes on with mail at your regular ISP level. The days when the mail admin was a hotshot guru are long long gone. Those same gurus are now off doing other cool shiny stuff (like telegram); and all us sysadmins are so over mail like we are over cassette tapes. Your average person now doing mail or more often than not somewhere between low and mid level. And worse, they often don't know what they are doing. Who knows why they communicate some of the things they do, because I sure don't. That, unfortunately, is the average state of affairs today. This might well not be the case for your ISP, but like you I can't see a good reason to use a different name for outbound mail. Have you asked them why as a direct question? -- Alan McKinnon [email protected]
