Chris, thanks for taking the time to explain all that and clearing up my confusion. It seems obvious now that I read your post and wonder why I didn't realize it before. I even mentioned ports 80 and 8080 in my question but the light bulb wasn't going on. LOL
Thanks again! John Chris Clifton wrote: > 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
