-----Original Message----- From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn [mailto:raymond@prolocation.net] Sent: 22 July 2004 09:32 To: SURBL Discussion list Subject: Re: [SURBL-Discuss] Thanks Jeff, 0.019 works on Rh
Hi!
bigevil.cf
Thats one that is doing a lot if think. CPU wise, its included in ws.surbl.org, so remove that one...
Do I just add ws in spamcop_uri.cf?
The standard 1 from the installation source is
# vi spamcop_uri.cf
uri SPAMCOP_URI_RBL eval:check_spamcop_uri_rbl('sc.surbl.org','127.0.0.2') describe SPAMCOP_URI_RBL URI's domain appears in spamcop database at sc.surbl.org tflags SPAMCOP_URI_RBL net
score SPAMCOP_URI_RBL 3.0
Sorry for the lame question.
Thanks
Tom
On Thursday, July 22, 2004, 12:59:25 AM, Thomas Kinghorn wrote:
From: Raymond Dijkxhoorn [mailto:raymond@prolocation.net]
bigevil.cf
Thats one that is doing a lot if think. CPU wise, its included in ws.surbl.org, so remove that one...
Do I just add ws in spamcop_uri.cf?
The standard 1 from the installation source is
# vi spamcop_uri.cf
uri SPAMCOP_URI_RBL eval:check_spamcop_uri_rbl('sc.surbl.org','127.0.0.2') describe SPAMCOP_URI_RBL URI's domain appears in spamcop database at sc.surbl.org tflags SPAMCOP_URI_RBL net
score SPAMCOP_URI_RBL 3.0
If you add a rule and score like:
uri WS_URI_RBL eval:check_spamcop_uri_rbl('ws.surbl.org','127.0.0.2') describe WS_URI_RBL URI's domain appears in sa-blacklist tflags WS_URI_RBL net
score WS_URI_RBL 3.0
than that should work.
Jeff C.
-
Jeff Chan -
Thomas Kinghorn