[SURBL-Discuss] RFC: pj.surbl.org - list from Joe Wein and Pr olocation data

Frank Ellermann nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de
Sun Sep 19 08:27:05 CEST 2004


Jeff Chan wrote:
 
> We can have an infinite number of lists in multi

There are many ways to say "7 bits ought to be enough
for everybody", but "infinite" is a bit exaggerated. ;-)

Or it's a new octal system, 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, INF

> Remember that the PJ records are already in multi, as
> part of WS

That's cheating.  If the WS bit is set I'd expect a WS
entry, with the WS policy and whitelisting instructions.

Sure, at the moment there are no different whitelisting
instructions for the MULTI sets, but that's not obvious.
And sooner or later it will change.
   
> I actually wanted the JW data to be separate in the
> beginning because it was a distinctly different and new
> data source with different a inclusion process, different
> spamtrap feeds, etc.

If it's really very different, then it's also good enough
for its own MULTI bit.  But a different set of spamtraps
is no real difference.  A different policy for inclusions,
exclusions, or whitelisting is interesting.

> FPs only hurt WS and make it less useful to people.

People expecting no FPs at all should try the empty list,
works like a charm.  Of course it won't identify any spam.

                     Bye, Frank




More information about the Discuss mailing list