Hey there,
I was noticing in SpamAssassin dev rule files there's:
urirhsbl T_URIBL_XS_SURBL xs.surbl.org. A body T_URIBL_XS_SURBL eval:check_uridnsbl('T_URIBL_XS_SURBL')
it doesn't seem to be a used list, according to the SURBL website, but the results are semi-decent:
1.896 2.2832 0.0000 1.000 0.86 0.01 T_URIBL_XS_SURBL
What are the plans for this list going forward? I'd like to either drop the test rule if XS isn't going anywhere, or promote it to an actual rule (preferably through multi) if it's going to stick around.
Thoughts? Thanks. :)
On Monday, March 6, 2006, 11:07:33 AM, Theo Dinter wrote:
Hey there,
I was noticing in SpamAssassin dev rule files there's:
urirhsbl T_URIBL_XS_SURBL xs.surbl.org. A body T_URIBL_XS_SURBL eval:check_uridnsbl('T_URIBL_XS_SURBL')
it doesn't seem to be a used list, according to the SURBL website, but the results are semi-decent:
1.896 2.2832 0.0000 1.000 0.86 0.01 T_URIBL_XS_SURBL
What are the plans for this list going forward? I'd like to either drop the test rule if XS isn't going anywhere, or promote it to an actual rule (preferably through multi) if it's going to stick around.
Processing on the list is currently halted, so the data are mostly stale. When I get a chance to work on a new list, we will probably test it as XS again and also call it that for production. So in a nutshell it's stalled for now but may be back later.
I will announce before we start up the list with any new data. Currently I'm working out the inclusion parameters.
Cheers,
Jeff C. -- Don't harm innocent bystanders.
On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 11:52:56AM -0800, Jeff Chan wrote:
Processing on the list is currently halted, so the data are mostly stale.
[...]
I will announce before we start up the list with any new data. Currently I'm working out the inclusion parameters.
Ok, cool. Since the results aren't useful then, I'll pull the rule and we can add another one in when the new list is setup. :) Thanks Jeff!
-
Jeff Chan -
Theo Van Dinter