[SURBL-Discuss] New SURBL TLD Files

Jeff Chan jeffc at surbl.org
Wed Mar 3 18:05:49 CET 2010


On 3/3/10, Bill Landry <bill at inetmsg.com> wrote:
> On 3/3/2010 12:42 AM, Jeff Chan wrote:
>  > On 3/2/10, Bill Landry <bill at inetmsg.com> wrote:
>  >> On 3/2/2010 5:48 PM, Raymond Dijkxhoorn wrote:
>  >>  > Hi!
>  >>  >
>  >>  >
>  >>  >> https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6335
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> that there are 2 new TLD files available for uses with SURBL:
>  >>  >> "two-level-tlds" and "three-level-tlds".
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> However, I am wondering where these files should be placed and if they
>  >>  >> need to be renamed and have .cf appended to them like the "90_2tld.cf"
>  >>  >> file URIBL supplies?
>  >>  >>
>  >>  >> Thanks in advance for any guidance or feedback.
>  >>  >>
>  >>  > Yups. If you want to put them inside SpamAssassin you most likely can
>  >>  > simply catch http://rulesemporium.com/rules/90_2tld.cf
>  >>  >
>  >>
>  >> Okay, but that really doesn't make sense, since there are different 2TLD
>  >>  and 3TLD domains listed in the 2 files available for download on the
>  >>  SURBL site.  There must be some reason for these files being made
>  >>  available for download and hour sync from SURBL?
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>  Bill
>  >
>  > You may need to create new .cf files with our TLD lists.  There may be
>  > an effort by SA to merge the TLD changes into their TLD data, but we
>  > have not heard back yet.
>  >
>  > Did you also see the SURBL TLD announcement which has some references:
>  >
>  > http://lists.surbl.org/pipermail/announce/2010-February/000202.html
>
>
> No, but thanks for the link.
>
>
>  > (Everyone reading this, please make sure you are signed up for the
>  > SURBL Announce mailing list.  Message volume is very low at a few
>  > messages per year.)
>
>
> I'll subscribe.
>
>  I added the two TLD files, added the appropriate "util_rb_2tld"
>  "util_rb_3tld" entries to the files, and all seems to be fine.
>
>  I did find that you had one 3TLD entry in your 2TLD file, which cause
>  spamassassin --lint to complain: co(dot)at(dot)pn

Thanks much Bill,
The error has been corrected.


More information about the Discuss mailing list