[SURBL-Discuss] Re: Which rules are replaces by *.surbl.org?

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Mon Jun 14 17:13:05 CEST 2004

On Monday, June 14, 2004, 2:03:11 PM, Chris Santerre wrote:
>>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc at surbl.org]

>>Ideally if folks want every function, they should:
>>0.  Use sc.surbl.org
>>1.  Use ws.surbl.org (which now has the be.surbl.org domains)
>>2.  *Not* use be.surbl.org (which is now redundant)
>>3.  Use BigEvil.cf (and perhaps MidEvil.cf also, depending
>>on how Chris and Paul work things out.)

> 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

I didn't think of it earlier, but that will increase the
overlapped coverage for folks using both of the above however.

Please be sure to let me know when you start feeding the larger
lists into BigEvil.cf so I can know when to stop feeding them
into be.  Don't want a feedback loop of those going into ws.
Accordingly I will also stop feeding be into ws at that time.

(Bill Stearns, please note the above.  My feed of be to you
should freeze at some point.  Chris we should definitely
coordinate when I should freeze the be I send Bill.  Please
let me know.)

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?

> Things should also pickup in the addition of new domains. More _trusted_
> sources are being worked on now. We are being really picky, and making
> people walk the Gauntlet of Fire! :D

More data sources sound good.  I'm glad we're being very careful
that false positives don't get in.  When we get a clearinghouse
set up to double check them, that will help.

Jeff C.

More information about the Discuss mailing list