On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 10:16:21PM -0400, Daryl C. W. O'Shea wrote: > If we do more frequent --net mass-checks we may individually run the > chance of being blocked by the providers of the (URI)DNSBLs such as > Spamhaus. > > Has anyone been blocked to date? Probably not given the once a week > frequency.
If done correctly, this isn't an issue. This is another benefit of
--reuse. :)
> Are the hit-rates of the lists high enough that the results that aren't
> cached by the use of --reuse low enough to fall under the block
> triggering level? Either way, I guess we should get around to figuring
You want as much as possible to be able to use --reuse.
> out a way of caching the non-hits. I'm thinking of a method that
It does this now, doesn't it? IIRC, --reuse says that if there is a
X-Spam-Status
header, it's assumed all the net rules were run and so they're not run again.
> assumes you ran the rules (based on the SA version in the message
> header) unless you've specifically told it you don't run a particular rule.
I started working on, but never fully implemented, the NetCache plugin.
The idea is that all network requests and responses (or lack thereof)
would be stored as a header in the message. Then on the mass-check run, that
data would be used for responses. This way, even some new rules could use
this information depending on what they're looking for...
> Should we look at getting zone transfers from the various providers and
> hosting a copy on the zone that committers could use?
That's great if we use the zone machine for DNS, that doesn't really work for
individuals running on our own machines... ;)
--
Randomly Selected Tagline:
"A leader leads from in front, by the power of example. A ruler pushes
from behind, by means of the club, the whip, the power of fear."
- Edward Abbey
pgprusHcNidcA.pgp
Description: PGP signature
