From discuss-bounces@lists.surbl.org Thu May 5 11:47:09 2005 To: John Gardiner Myers jgmyers@proofpoint.com In-Reply-To: 427A6488.8020603@proofpoint.com From: jm@jmason.org (Justin Mason) ... Cc: Chris Santerre csanterre@MerchantsOverseas.com, quinlan@pathname.com, dev@spamassassin.apache.org, discuss@lists.surbl.org Subject: [SURBL-Discuss] Re: registrar boundary inconsistencies ...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1

John Gardiner Myers writes:

...

Daniel Quinlan wrote:

...

We can't just add them willy-nilly.

Why not? Treat them like .us -- do two queries.

we don't currently do that. but that may be a good option, actually! allow url_to_domain to return >1 datum, and query all of them.

In the case of .us, and these private registrars, return 2 domains, "foo.eu.org" and "eu.org", or "foo.state.us" and "bar.foo.state.us".

• --j.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS

iD4DBQFCemjHMJF5cimLx9ARAsWsAJ91vAjk0Mn7J7M+TbFUKxn3b1bDOwCWKbuw b/NvALdeCXRn600SsZ4trw== =6YpK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

---

Discuss mailing list Discuss@lists.surbl.org http://lists.surbl.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Anybody look at bloomington.in. us recently? Care to guess who registered it. (Hint: It seem only to be used to get SpamCop reports for certain IP ranges in China.)

Paul Shupak track@plectere.com

P.S. Unfortunately the sets of spammers and registrars are not disjoint (and the set of large scale spammers seems almost to be a subset of the set of registrar resellers).