TB will be using port 1025 to communicate with the local server (hence localhost) running on your computer as part of the extension code. The extension will then communicate with the web site server using HTTP on port 80 across the Internet. When using a webmail extension TB doesn't communicate directly with the web site, the extension acts as a middleman, communicating on one side locally with TB, and on the other remotely with the web site. In effect when TB requests new mail, this request is sent to the extension. The extension responds to this request by logging into the web site and "reading" any new mails. The extension then converts the email that it has read on the web site into POP protocol form and sends it to TB, where TB accepts it just as though it had come from a regular POP server.
Blues Renegade wrote: > Alan, I am confused by your explanation. Webmail--my mail sitting on > Yahoo and Hotmail servers--is external to my LAN. So, how are the > extensions using the ports internally? If my Webmail accounts in TB are > configured to use port 1025, is that port being used to communicate > between TB and the Webmail extensions? If that's the case, then how are > the extensions and TB communicating out to the webmail? I understand > that the extension's code emulates a browser login, so, are they > actually using port 80, or 8080, to do the external work of logging in, > then receiving and sending my mail? Somewhere in the loop an external > connection has to be made, so please clear up how and where this is done. > > Thanks! > > John > > > alanrf wrote: > >> @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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
