[setting back to the correct distribution list; I broke it by manually setting the SA developers list before.]
On Monday, June 14, 2004, 4:18:02 PM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
Yes, but I want to add that there _WILL_ be a "BigEvil style" cf version of ws.surbl.org for those people who won't/can't use the SURBL net lookups for some strange reason. This is still being worked on. One of the main reasons I haven't updates BE in a while is because I've been working on the new WS submission stuff. (Thanks to everyone who is involved in that!)
Thanks, I forgot about that other direction of rules style entries moving from sa-blacklist back into bigevil.cf. Sounds like the best of both worlds in a nice mirror of both types:
A. ws.surbl.org gets all the "static" domains from BigEvil, sa-blacklist, etc. in the form of a SURBL.
B. BigEvil.cf gets all the domains, including those from sa-blacklist, heavily wildcarded ones, etc. in the form of a ruleset.
I dont see the problem listsing them inside a SURBL. The extra few kb it will take on the nameservers ? For me i would like to put the preassure on DNS, not on every single box that has to do expression lookups, those will cost a lot more CPU... Most of the times its not the nameservers that cant keep up, but the mailboxes...
ws.surbl.org will continue to get all the domains that are practical to enumerate from sa-blacklist, BigEvil.cf, MidEvil.cf, etc. We don't be getting heavily wildcarded ones or ones with regular expression ranges, etc, into SURBLs since BIND and rbldnsd would not know how to handle them.
Something like *spammer.biz would be impossible to enumerate, for example, whereas spammer[0-2].biz can be successfully enumerated and would be included in ws.surbl.org as spammer0.biz, spammer1.biz, spammer2.biz .
Does that sound right? :-)
Also: *when should we announce that be domains are now in ws, and that people should stop using be?* Is everyone comfortable that the combined ws is now working as expected, including the be domains being folded in?
Yes. Let me know when i should start slaving them. Same applies for the rsync...
ws and be changes should propagate automatically as things are set up now.
We're still waiting to hear back from people about the performance, especially a false positive rate from ob.surbl.org before announcing or distributing them. And multi.surbl.org presumably doesn't have code that can use it yet. Those are the only new lists needing some feedback/coding.
Jeff C.