[184868] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Google IMAP (with k9mail)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Suresh Ramasubramanian)
Fri Oct 23 12:40:19 2015
X-Original-To: nanog@nanog.org
From: Suresh Ramasubramanian <ops.lists@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5117998.87.1445617228798.JavaMail.root@benjamin.baylink.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2015 22:10:13 +0530
To: Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces@nanog.org
Not protocols as much as less secure ssl ciphers is my guess=20
--srs
> On 23-Oct-2015, at 9:50 PM, Jay Ashworth <jra@baylink.com> wrote:
>=20
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.lists@gmail.com>
>=20
>> Incoming settings
>> IMAP server: imap.gmail.com
>> Port: 993
>> Security type: SSL (always)
>>=20
>> Outgoing settings
>> SMTP server: smtp.gmail.com
>> Port: 465
>> Security type: SSL (always)
>=20
> Hijack: to use k9mail with gmail IMAP, I have to enable "allow less secure=
=20
> clients" in the gmail web UI, but neither the Gmail people nor the k9mail
> people seem to want to actually document which protocol is disliked or
> required.
>=20
> Anyone have any actual facts on this point?
>=20
> Cheers,
> -- jra
> --=20
> Jay R. Ashworth Baylink jra@baylink=
.com
> Designer The Things I Think RFC 2=
100
> Ashworth & Associates http://www.bcp38.info 2000 Land Rover=
DII
> St Petersburg FL USA BCP38: Ask For It By Name! +1 727 647 1=
274
