On Monday 01 October 2007 13:41, Justin Mason wrote: > I think this is a case where pragmatism may need to be applied. The thing > is, we *could* disable Razor, and later DCC, back then, because there were > alternatives doing more or less the same thing. If we disable Spamhaus, I > think we'd be in a much worse position. :( They're an important DNSBL.
One other thing to consider in these arguments, is that in most environments where they wish to use Spamhaus data, or any other RBL data for that matter, usually have separate processes to block senders in that space, so it would seem redundant for SA to do a check that in most cases will already have occurred. And that already allows for the flexibility that various licences dictate. -- -- "Catch the Magic of Linux..." ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Michael Peddemors - President/CEO - LinuxMagic Products, Services, Support and Development Visit us at http://www.linuxmagic.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ A Wizard IT Company - For More Info http://www.wizard.ca "LinuxMagic" is a Registered TradeMark of Wizard Tower TechnoServices Ltd. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 604-589-0037 Beautiful British Columbia, Canada This email and any electronic data contained are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to which they are addressed. Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent those of the company.
