Re: Which Log?

2005-11-11 Thread Peter Ouwehand
Hello Alexander S. Kunz, Greg & others, on Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:40:44 +0100 (2005-11-10 23:40:44 in .nl) in the message with reference you [AK] wrote (at least in part): ASK> If I understand the logging function correctly, it logs communication with ASK> the server. If TB can't connect to the ser

Re[2]: Which Log?

2005-11-11 Thread Paul Van Noord
11/11/2005 7:15 AM Hi Alexander, On 11/11/2005 Alexander S. Kunz wrote: ASK> Another thing that could cause this is a slow nameserver response. You ASK> could try to ping your smtp-server and write down the IP address. Then ASK> enter the IP address of the server in TBs config, not the name. I

Re: Which Log?

2005-11-10 Thread Alexander S. Kunz
Hello ...in addition to my previous message... on 11-Nov-2005 at 08:40 you (Alexander S. Kunz) wrote: > Enable the POP3 log (if you're using POP) and you'll see. :-) > [08:38:12] C: Connected to localhost, port If the smtp.log is enabled, it starts with "connected to..." as well, so unti

Re: Which Log?

2005-11-10 Thread Alexander S. Kunz
Hello Greg Strong & everyone else, on 10-Nov-2005 at 23:54 you (Greg Strong) wrote: > Hello Alexander, > On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:40:44 +0100 GMT(11/10/2005, 4:40 PM -0600 GMT), > per mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Alexander S. Kunz wrote: >> If I understand the logging function correctly, it logs communi

Re: Which Log?

2005-11-10 Thread Alexander S. Kunz
Hello Peter Ouwehand & everyone else, on 10-Nov-2005 at 23:24 you (Peter Ouwehand) wrote: > As it does not log more details, the user (Greg, me, others ...) starts > looking in the defined "Sending Protocol" log file, which of course was > enabled, having to conclude _nothing_at_all_ concerning "

Re: Which Log?

2005-11-10 Thread Peter Ouwehand
Hello Marek Mikus, on Thu, 10 Nov 2005 23:05:28 +0100 (2005-11-10 23:05:28 in .nl) in the message with reference you [MM] wrote (at least in part): >> Why 'check the log for details' when nothing is added? MM> in Log pane, You will see latest message only, so if You see "check MM> the log for d

Re: Which Log?

2005-11-10 Thread Marek Mikus
Hello all, Thursday, November 10, 2005, Greg Strong wrote: > Just an added note here. Per the account log: > ,- [ Account log ] > | 11/10/2005, 10:47:44: SEND - Some messages were not sent - check the log > for details > `- > Why 'check the log for details' when nothing is added? in

Re: Which Log?

2005-11-10 Thread Peter Ouwehand
Hello Greg Strong, on Thu, 10 Nov 2005 11:59:20 -0600 (2005-11-10 18:59:20 in .nl) in the message with reference you [GS] wrote (at least in part): GS> !11/10/2005, 10:47:44: SEND - Could not connect to the server GS> 11/10/2005, 10:47:44: SEND - connection finished - 0 messages sent GS> 11/

Re: Which Log?

2005-11-10 Thread Alexander S. Kunz
Hello Greg Strong & everyone else, on 10-Nov-2005 at 18:59 you (Greg Strong) wrote: > I went into Account Properties | Transport Logging | Protocol Logging > | and selected 'enable logging' for the sending protocol. The problem > was that I didn't see any detail in the log when I wasn't able to