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

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Tue Jun 15 15:24:14 CEST 2004

On Tuesday, June 15, 2004, 9:45:06 AM, Chris Santerre wrote:
>>From: Jeff Chan [mailto:jeffc at surbl.org]

>>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.)

> Well I haven't even been updating BE. My update today removed some FP and
> regex goofs. Nothing added. I have been adding to [ws] because it is MUCH
> easier :D You can pretty much stop feeding [be] into [ws] right now. 

Thanks, those fixes were good to get into BigEvil.cf and [be].

I've disabled forwarding of any updated [be] data to [ws] now.

>>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?

> You could do that now. Stating that [be] will not change until the [ws] to
> bigevil.cf script work is complete. Once that is done I will add the dynamic
> stuff to BE. But from now on, I only update static domains to [ws].

Should I freeze my version of [be] now?

Probably we don't want to get the really dynamic version of
BigEvil as a SURBL, nor the version with the [ws] data included
in BigEvil, since that part would be a duplicate of what's in
[ws], sort of a feedback loop.  I'm trying to break that loop
before it starts.... 

Jeff C.

More information about the Discuss mailing list