@Blues Renegade

I think you are missing the point that the port numbers used by the
Webmail extension are *localhost* ports.  These are entirely internal
to your machine and bear no connection to the list you have posted.
You can  run a server on your system and use port 1025 for it for
external users to connect to it and run Webmail using port *localhost*
port 1025 at the same time without conflict.

So to be clear - the list of "well known" ports has no application at
all to the ports used by the Webmail extensions.

On Oct 3, 7:45 am, Blues Renegade <[email protected]> wrote:
> In layman language:
>
> Port 1025 is listed as being assigned to: network blackjack
>
> If I chose to run a blackjack server on my local machine AND that blackjack
> server defaults to port 1025, THEN I could have a collision issue with the
> webmail extension IF I have ALSO configured it to use port 1025.
>
> Otherwise, without a blackjack server (or any other server) installed that
> uses port 1025, I can safely use port 1025 to my heart's content.
>
> John
>
> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 8:58 AM, Chris Clifton <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > What you use for internal ports on your own system, such as the port
> > numbers used by the extensions to communicate  with Thunderbird is
> > entirely up to you. Such internal port assignments have no effect on any
> > other Internet user, the only question is whether your operating system
> > allows you to use the port numbers or not. External ports used to
> > communicate across public networks such as the Internet are best chosen
> > to follow accepted standard allocations, but no-one has the right to
> > enforce this. However use of non-standard ports on public networks could
> > cause confusion, no sense in rocking the boat just for the sake of it.
>
> > Phil wrote:
> > > There must be important relevance to this post, but I do not know it
> > > as I have probably missed many conversations leading up to your
> > > posting of it and its connected topics.
>
> > > Using Freepops, Web2Pop and Webmail extensions for Yahoo.com,
> > > Hotmail.com, (e)mail.com, linuxmail.org etc through Outlook Express,
> > > Eudora and Thunderbird at various times I have arbitrarily chosen to
> > > use Ports 1100 and 2000.  Is this the sort of thing you have in mind?
>
> > > Does doing this contravene the content of the IANA documented uses:
> > > looking at the list neither seems to be too specialised or
> > > complicated.
> > > Who has the authority, the clout, to tell us what we can or cannot
> > > use?  Is there some central organising body with future planning?  Who
> > > appointed them and where did THEY get the power, authority or clout to
> > > dictate conditions in this frontier virtual world of the Internet?
>
> > > Would you be so kind as to give me an idea if I should go to really
> > > high numbers, and if so which work AOK?
>
> > > Thanks, Phillip
>
> > > On Oct 3, 9:54 am, Blues Renegade <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > >>http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers
>
> > --
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Thunderbird Webmail Extension" group.
To post to this group, send email to 
[email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/thunderbird-webmail-extension?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to