http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3998





------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED]  2005-03-28 16:09 -------
> I don't really see how a DNSWL is much different from a DNSBL which we 
> currently implement via a plugin (URIDNSBL).

The URIDNSBL plugin contains its own logic for scanning the body and a
dispatcher for multiple concurrent DNS requests. It's quite a different animal
from a wrapper that examines two header fields and then calls
check_rbl_backend(). For that matter, is it even possible for a plugin to call
check_rbl_backend()?

> A Habeas, or Accreditor, plugin would still be included, and enabled, 
> with the distribution just like URIDNSBL, SPF, SpamCop, etc.

SPF is a plugin because it includes a heavy library and needs to issue its own
(possibly unbounded) set of resolver requests. The SpamCop plugin is for
*sending* complaint mail; checking the SpamCop DNSBL is a simple rule that
invokes check_rbl() in EvalTests.pm.

I think the Habeas Accreditor code is more comparable to checking Sender Base,
which is in Dns.pm.

There's another issue, which I should have pointed out in my first reply: In the
presence of an accreditor, I need to disable the old Habeas "haiku" code. If I
didn't, senders who are in transition between the "haiku" and the Accreditor
style would get a -16 bonus. I don't think that's possible from a plugin.



------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.

Reply via email to