A Broadband and ADSL forum. BroadbanterBanter

Welcome to BroadbanterBanter.

You are currently viewing as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today.

Go Back   Home » BroadbanterBanter forum » Newsgroup Discussions » uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband)
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) (uk.telecom.broadband) Discussion of broadband services, technology and equipment as provided in the UK. Discussions of specific services based on ADSL, cable modems or other broadband technology are also on-topic. Advertising is not allowed.

BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old December 28th 17, 12:53 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Andy Burns[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 315
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

Chronos wrote:

This is not a level playing field. It's a bugger to keep the ball on
the kick-off point long enough to get a run up to it, so tilted is
the arena.


I'm sure many here have experienced BT's announcements of ADSL2, delays,
21CN enabling of exchanges, delays, FTTC rollout, delays, requirement
for BDUK subsidy, delays and did I mention delays?

Of course once BT have announced a certain area is on their list, it's a
big disincentive for any other operator to consider that area, then BT
can delay a few months at a time over a period of years, to keep the
competition backed-off.

There ought to be a *hefty* weekly penalty on BT for not meeting any
announced dates, with the proceeds going to fund nearby "notspots".

  #32  
Old January 30th 18, 12:51 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 550
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

On Wednesday, 27 December 2017 15:02:37 UTC, Woody wrote:
Don't think you lot are the only ones.

VM often rejects mail addresses both incoming and outgoing as unknown.
Try sending it again and it rejects again. Close down Outlook and it
says there are unsent mails - respond yes and sometimes it will send
them (or some of them if different senders) others fail again. Next
time you open Outlook it (usually) sends them immediately without
problem.

It quite often denies knowledge of incoming addresses as well, and
that too fails until about the third try.


That's teknologie for you I presume.....


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com


Web mail down this morning - entered correct emaddy and password and got the "locked out - too many failed login attempts" message. Outlook connected OK, although server problem on a sub-account.
  #33  
Old January 30th 18, 01:08 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 514
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

R. Mark Clayton wrote:

On Wednesday, 27 December 2017 15:02:37 UTC, Woody wrote:
Don't think you lot are the only ones.

VM often rejects mail addresses both incoming and outgoing as unknown.
Try sending it again and it rejects again. Close down Outlook and it
says there are unsent mails - respond yes and sometimes it will send
them (or some of them if different senders) others fail again. Next
time you open Outlook it (usually) sends them immediately without
problem.

It quite often denies knowledge of incoming addresses as well, and
that too fails until about the third try.


That's teknologie for you I presume.....


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com


Web mail down this morning - entered correct emaddy and password and got
the "locked out - too many failed login attempts" message. Outlook
connected OK, although server problem on a sub-account.


You are better off installing IoT and your own mail server in home.

For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments
have to be redone again and years to catch up on
lost opportunities.
  #34  
Old January 30th 18, 02:57 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 550
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 12:09:00 UTC, 7 wrote:
R. Mark Clayton wrote:

On Wednesday, 27 December 2017 15:02:37 UTC, Woody wrote:
Don't think you lot are the only ones.

VM often rejects mail addresses both incoming and outgoing as unknown.
Try sending it again and it rejects again. Close down Outlook and it
says there are unsent mails - respond yes and sometimes it will send
them (or some of them if different senders) others fail again. Next
time you open Outlook it (usually) sends them immediately without
problem.

It quite often denies knowledge of incoming addresses as well, and
that too fails until about the third try.


That's teknologie for you I presume.....


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com


Web mail down this morning - entered correct emaddy and password and got
the "locked out - too many failed login attempts" message. Outlook
connected OK, although server problem on a sub-account.


You are better off installing IoT and your own mail server in home.

For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments
have to be redone again and years to catch up on
lost opportunities.


Fixed IP addresses cost money and there is only one for every two people.
  #35  
Old January 30th 18, 04:34 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Chris Green
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 169
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments
have to be redone again and years to catch up on
lost opportunities.


Fixed IP addresses cost money and there is only one for every two people.


Very little money, PlusNet for example charge a one-off fee of 5 for
a static IP.

--
Chris Green

  #36  
Old January 30th 18, 04:38 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 514
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

R. Mark Clayton wrote:


VM often rejects mail addresses both incoming and outgoing as unknown.
Try sending it again and it rejects again. Close down Outlook and it
says there are unsent mails - respond yes and sometimes it will send
them (or some of them if different senders) others fail again. Next
time you open Outlook it (usually) sends them immediately without
problem.

It quite often denies knowledge of incoming addresses as well, and
that too fails until about the third try.


That's teknologie for you I presume.....


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Web mail down this morning - entered correct emaddy and password and
got
the "locked out - too many failed login attempts" message. Outlook
connected OK, although server problem on a sub-account.


You are better off installing IoT and your own mail server in home.

For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments
have to be redone again and years to catch up on
lost opportunities.


Fixed IP addresses cost money and there is only one for every two people.


If IPV6 was sold at a cost of $1 per address, there would be some 20 billion
dollars on the table today and we would not run out of addresses
for the immediate future.

  #37  
Old January 30th 18, 05:08 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 514
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

Chris Green wrote:

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments
have to be redone again and years to catch up on
lost opportunities.


Fixed IP addresses cost money and there is only one for every two people.


Very little money, PlusNet for example charge a one-off fee of 5 for
a static IP.


Need to set a minimum price like $250 per IPV4 address to force everyone
to change to IPV6 address. Sell the IPV6 addresses at $1 per address, and
you probably got $20 billion on the table almost immediately.

  #38  
Old January 30th 18, 06:35 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 550
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 15:38:30 UTC, 7 wrote:
R. Mark Clayton wrote:


VM often rejects mail addresses both incoming and outgoing as unknown.
Try sending it again and it rejects again. Close down Outlook and it
says there are unsent mails - respond yes and sometimes it will send
them (or some of them if different senders) others fail again. Next
time you open Outlook it (usually) sends them immediately without
problem.

It quite often denies knowledge of incoming addresses as well, and
that too fails until about the third try.


That's teknologie for you I presume.....


--
Woody

harrogate3 at ntlworld dot com

Web mail down this morning - entered correct emaddy and password and
got
the "locked out - too many failed login attempts" message. Outlook
connected OK, although server problem on a sub-account.

You are better off installing IoT and your own mail server in home.

For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments
have to be redone again and years to catch up on
lost opportunities.


Fixed IP addresses cost money and there is only one for every two people.


If IPV6 was sold at a cost of $1 per address, there would be some 20 billion
dollars on the table today and we would not run out of addresses
for the immediate future.


True. Many would need a new router though.
  #39  
Old January 30th 18, 06:39 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
R. Mark Clayton[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 550
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 16:08:19 UTC, 7 wrote:
Chris Green wrote:

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments
have to be redone again and years to catch up on
lost opportunities.

Fixed IP addresses cost money and there is only one for every two people.


Very little money, PlusNet for example charge a one-off fee of 5 for
a static IP.


Need to set a minimum price like $250 per IPV4 address to force everyone
to change to IPV6 address. Sell the IPV6 addresses at $1 per address, and
you probably got $20 billion on the table almost immediately.


Oh for the days when top addresses were still available. 195 is I believe BT's.
  #40  
Old January 30th 18, 09:16 PM posted to uk.telecom.broadband
Bob Eager[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 131
Default BT [Yahoo!] servers screwed yet again

On Tue, 30 Jan 2018 15:34:16 +0000, Chris Green wrote:

R. Mark Clayton wrote:
For this to have happened as the norm as part of IoT,
everyone needs fixed IP addresses. Now all of those investments have
to be redone again and years to catch up on lost opportunities.


Fixed IP addresses cost money and there is only one for every two
people.


Very little money, PlusNet for example charge a one-off fee of 5 for a
static IP.


Glad I got my free /26 when I did!
 




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Am I screwed? Ninju uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 46 February 5th 09 11:30 PM
screwed by a Virgin thedarkman uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 14 June 5th 07 11:47 PM
is this line screwed? nick uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 3 November 1st 06 09:22 AM
Am I a muppet, or is my network screwed... Marcus Fox uk.comp.home-networking (UK home networking) 3 July 31st 03 09:52 PM
Zen are screwed Draxen uk.telecom.broadband (UK broadband) 56 July 22nd 03 11:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
Copyright 2004-2018 BroadbanterBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.