Poster | Thread |
Gregor
| |
YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 13-Jun-2016 7:08:09
| | [ #1 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| I am looking for a new email service to get rid of Gmail...
I already tested Runbox (there is a free test account which has also POP/IMAP), and basically it works with YAM, but there is always a half-minute delay before the SSL connection is created and the transfer of messages starts. In Gmail there is no such delay, used with the same internet connection.
I tested it with v. 2.7 and latest 2.10 beta, and also with the latest Simplemail. All of them has this delay issue. For comparison, I tried also Thunderbird (in Linux) with the same connection and there was not any delay!
So the delay problem seems to be 'Amiga specific'! What might be the reason, and is there any workaround for it?
-- In Hushmail there is no POP/IMAP in the free test account, so I cannot give it a try. Has anyone who has has the Premiun account tested how YAM or other Amiga mail programs work with it? Are there any SSL or delay issues?
Regards,
Gregor |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Gregor
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 13-Jun-2016 12:56:21
| | [ #2 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| I did some further testing with YAM 2.7 in 'debug' mode... When I connected to Runbox, I got the following listing:
SERVER[0016]: +OK POP3 ready CLIENT[0006]: STLS SERVER[0005]: +OK
Waiting here half a minute!
CLIENT[0013]: USER xxxxxx SERVER[0005]: +OK CLIENT[0022]: PASS zzzzzzzz SERVER[0016]: +OK Logged in. CLIENT[0006]: STAT SERVER[0013]: +OK y yyyyy CLIENT[0006]: LIST SERVER[0017]: +OK 8 messages: . . .
So, why that extra waiting after the server has already returned +OK ?!?
Regards,
Gregor
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Hypex
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 13-Jun-2016 15:13:30
| | [ #3 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 6-May-2007 Posts: 11180
From: Greensborough, Australia | | |
|
| @Gregor
What machine are you running it on? Do you have a CPU meter? I wonder if the delay is called by encryption. Which these days would need a powerful CPU to keep up. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
tbreeden
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 13-Jun-2016 16:45:16
| | [ #4 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 8-Feb-2004 Posts: 117
From: Charlottesville, Virginia, USA | | |
|
| @Gregor
I use Runbox with Yam and only occasionally experience such a delay.
Not sure what triggers it, but sometimes I suspect it is due to a large buildup of messages not yet downloaded from the Runbox server.
It could also be due to a few large messages being downloaded. One thing to do is under the settings config TCP/IP : "Preselection" can be set to "large Messages". and "Download messages larger than" to, say, 1024K.
Under this setting, then before any downloading batch that includes any message(s) larger than that, you will get a popup requester giving you the header info and size of all the messages in the batch larger than that size and you can deselect any you don't want.
Also, see the Yam help about "(Re)building folders' indices". Building the folder indices can take a while, but usually is done only once (eg on first run of a newly installed Yam). Yam will rebuild them on its own, however, in certain circumstances (eg, if it finds inconsistant file/folder dates).
I'm currently using AOS4.1FE, the 2.10 Beta Yam (Jun 3, 2016), and amisslmaster.library 3.7 (04/02/2006). edit: on AmigaOne X1000
Tom
Last edited by tbreeden on 13-Jun-2016 at 04:46 PM.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Gregor
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 13-Jun-2016 17:54:27
| | [ #5 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Hypex
Quote:
Hypex wrote: @Gregor
What machine are you running it on? Do you have a CPU meter? I wonder if the delay is called by encryption. Which these days would need a powerful CPU to keep up. |
I am using a A4000T/060. But encryption of what...? Is there some encryption performed when creating the SLL connection?
If you look at the debug listing in my second message the delay is in phase of making SLL connection, before I am even logged in. Thus it has nothing to do with the messages and their actual processing or transport...
Regards,
Gregor |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Gregor
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 13-Jun-2016 18:41:33
| | [ #6 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @tbreeden
Quote:
tbreeden wrote: @Gregor
I use Runbox with Yam and only occasionally experience such a delay.
Not sure what triggers it, but sometimes I suspect it is due to a large buildup of messages not yet downloaded from the Runbox server.
It could also be due to a few large messages being downloaded. One thing to do is under the settings config TCP/IP : "Preselection" can be set to "large Messages". and "Download messages larger than" to, say, 1024K.
Under this setting, then before any downloading batch that includes any message(s) larger than that, you will get a popup requester giving you the header info and size of all the messages in the batch larger than that size and you can deselect any you don't want.
...
I'm currently using AOS4.1FE, the 2.10 Beta Yam (Jun 3, 2016), and amisslmaster.library 3.7 (04/02/2006). edit: on AmigaOne X1000
Tom
|
Interesting... Glad to hear it works for you!
I use the preselection, but in my case the delay is ALWAYS in the phase of creating SSL connection, before I am even logged in (see the debug listing in my second posting), thus it has nothing to do with the messages or their transfer...
I am using OS 3.5 and AMISSL 3.6 for 68xxx, which is the latest AFAIK. Unfortunately I cannot test this with OS 4.1 as my CSPPC does not anymore boot to it . I Have to manage with 060 and 3.5...
Regards,
Gregor |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Gregor
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 13-Jun-2016 20:16:25
| | [ #7 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Hypex
I tested now the CPU usage with IdleA68K... It is indeed 100% during these 'delays' when YAM is trying to create the SSL connection!
The next question is, why this happens only when connecting to Runbox and not with Gmail...?
Regards,
Gregor
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Hypex
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 14-Jun-2016 14:27:59
| | [ #8 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 6-May-2007 Posts: 11180
From: Greensborough, Australia | | |
|
| @Gregor
Quote:
I am using a A4000T/060. But encryption of what...? |
The data layer under the SSL that is set up. So yes encryption would be performed in setting up keys and with encryption and decryption of data.
Quote:
It is indeed 100% during these 'delays' when YAM is trying to create the SSL connection! |
Ah there you go. Seems my stab in the dark may have shed some light on the subject.
Quote:
The next question is, why this happens only when connecting to Runbox and not with Gmail...? |
It could depend on how deep encryption goes. If it just does SSL on the login or on all data as well. The setup should tell you this info.
I use YAM and SSL with Yahoo mail but I don't notice any delay apart from connection speed. I use it on my AmigaOne which is faster than an 060 but it also means emails are downloaded to my machine with POP. So it has to become a main email machine with limited access from other devices.
Is it your plan to use your Amiga as your mail email hub? |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Gregor
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 14-Jun-2016 17:25:57
| | [ #9 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Hypex
Quote:
Hypex wrote:
Ah there you go. Seems my stab in the dark may have shed some light on the subject. |
Indeed... Thanks for that tip!
Quote:
It could depend on how deep encryption goes. If it just does SSL on the login or on all data as well. The setup should tell you this info.
|
Runbox itself does not have any setup for POP, so the only settings to change are those of YAM. I did test both SLS and TLS but did not find much difference between them.
Quote:
I use YAM and SSL with Yahoo mail but I don't notice any delay apart from connection speed. I use it on my AmigaOne which is faster than an 060 but it also means emails are downloaded to my machine with POP. So it has to become a main email machine with limited access from other devices.
Is it your plan to use your Amiga as your mail email hub? |
I have used my A4000T/CSPPC as my primary mail machine since I got OS 4.1 classic and installed YAM... Now the things became more complicated as my PPC side stopped to boot a few weeks ago. Have not yet been able to localize the exact source of the problem yet. Would need some cross testing...
Regards,
Gregor |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Hypex
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 18-Jun-2016 16:09:30
| | [ #10 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 6-May-2007 Posts: 11180
From: Greensborough, Australia | | |
|
| @Gregor
Quote:
Runbox itself does not have any setup for POP, so the only settings to change are those of YAM. |
That could be a problem. AFAIK YAM only does POP. I'm not aware of any IMAP support. Nothing in settings I can see.
Another option could be SimpleMail. AFAIK it supports IMAP but it may be only partitial.
Quote:
Now the things became more complicated as my PPC side stopped to boot a few weeks ago. |
Yes that would make it a bit hard. Tried the PPC Boot disk yet? |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Dandy
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 24-Jun-2016 7:34:21
| | [ #11 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 24-Mar-2003 Posts: 3049
From: Cologne * Germany | | |
|
| @Gregor
Quote:
Gregor wrote: @tbreeden
... I am using OS 3.5 and AMISSL 3.6 for 68xxx, which is the latest AFAIK. Unfortunately I cannot test this with OS 4.1 as my CSPPC does not anymore boot to it . I Have to manage with 060 and 3.5...
Regards,
Gregor
|
Hmm . I also have an towered A4k with CSPPC (since 1997). Once or twice a year mine also refuses to boot.
While I thought initially that my CSPPC was broken, I found out it wasn't.
It just refused to boot because the contacts of the connector between CSPPC and motherboard were corroded. I treated the contacts properly with off-the-shelf contact spray, unplugged and re-plugged the CSPPC several times and after it was completely dry again, I re-fitted it and powered the beast on.
And up to now it always booted again after this treatment.
Perhaps your CSPPC has a similar problem? Have you already tried to clean the contacts properly?_________________ Ciao
Dandy __________________________________________ If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him. He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him! (Albert Einstein) |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Gregor
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 5-Jul-2016 18:35:58
| | [ #12 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Dandy
Quote:
Dandy wrote:
Hmm . I also have an towered A4k with CSPPC (since 1997). Once or twice a year mine also refuses to boot.
While I thought initially that my CSPPC was broken, I found out it wasn't.
It just refused to boot because the contacts of the connector between CSPPC and motherboard were corroded. I treated the contacts properly with off-the-shelf contact spray, unplugged and re-plugged the CSPPC several times and after it was completely dry again, I re-fitted it and powered the beast on.
And up to now it always booted again after this treatment.
Perhaps your CSPPC has a similar problem? Have you already tried to clean the contacts properly? |
When the symptoms were still occasional I did clean the contacts with an electronic spray, but it did not seem to help... Now I can still boot with the 060 (to OS 3.5), while the PPC always stops to a yellow screen or a guru loop. Does the 604e use some pins of the CSPPC connector that the 060 does not use at all? If not, then a contact problem should cause similar problems to both processors.
Regards,
Gregor |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Dandy
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 19-Jul-2016 9:03:55
| | [ #13 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 24-Mar-2003 Posts: 3049
From: Cologne * Germany | | |
|
| @Gregor
Quote:
Gregor wrote: @Dandy
... Does the 604e use some pins of the CSPPC connector that the 060 does not use at all?
|
I don't know.
Quote:
Gregor wrote:
If not, then a contact problem should cause similar problems to both processors. ...
|
Not necessarily. In my case I cannot boot at all, as the classic OS exclusively runs on the 68060. So I cannot check if the PPC is working when the 68k isn't working. Even if I wanted to boot to OS 4.x I cannot check that, as for this the 68060 is required initially. Theoretically it might be possible that the PPC is running, while the 68060 refuses to work due to contact problems.
At times it happens that that I can hear the clicking of my floppy drives, but the system does not boot. If I then connect an old Amiga Monitor to the Amiga Video Output, I can see the 3.1 Kickstart message (the floppy disk moving into the floppy drive). This means the 68k cpu is working, but my UW-SCSI host adapter is not working. If I insert my emergency disk the system boots from the floppy disk and I can see the UW-SCSI isn't available. So sometimes the cpu is not affected by the contact problems, but the UW-SCSI (which I use exclusively) on the CSPPC is.
Have you already tried to start a PPC software (like e.g. Wipeout 2097) after booting to OS 3.9?
Last edited by Dandy on 11-Aug-2016 at 12:53 PM.
_________________ Ciao
Dandy __________________________________________ If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him. He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him! (Albert Einstein) |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Gregor
| |
Re: YAM with Runbox and Hushmail Posted on 19-Jul-2016 11:56:24
| | [ #14 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Sep-2011 Posts: 212
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Dandy
It seems that our problems are different...
>Have you already tried to start a PPC software (like e.g. Wipeout 2097) after >booting to OS 3.6?
I had some ImageFx filters etc. using PPC, and they were either not working at all, or worked very unreliably.
I also noticed some irregular and strange boot problems with 060/OS3.5 when I had PPC.library and one other PPC-library still in LIBS:. After I removed them, my old side has been totally stable.
Regards,
Gregor |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|