[SURBL-Discuss] Proposing a greylist

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Thu Sep 2 19:14:50 CEST 2004


On Thursday, September 2, 2004, 9:15:54 AM, Steven Champeon wrote:
> on Thu, Sep 02, 2004 at 09:05:08AM -0700, Bret Miller wrote:
>> > 1)We DO NOT include it in multi. 
>> 
>> Please reconsider this... Including it in multi means a lot less DNS
>> traffic, and that's a serious plus when you're using a greylist that you
>> probably won't use to increase the spam score by much.

> No, no, no. 

> If anything, the unconfirmed list WILL contain FPs. It WILL certainly be
> a /superset/ of all the other lists. Including it in multi simply means
> corrupting multi for no real purpose, and is almost certainly going to
> mean that those least sophisticated users will get FPs as a result.

Agreed.

Jeff C.



More information about the Discuss mailing list