https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6634
Adam Katz <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #2 from Adam Katz <[email protected]> 2011-07-25 20:55:18 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > There seems to be a full-external check of bb.barracudacentral.org, which I > think was mistakenly not removed when bug 5984 was closed and > RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT was implemented: > > ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DNSEval > header __RCVD_IN_BRBL eval:check_rbl('brbl','bb.barracudacentral.org') > tflags __RCVD_IN_BRBL net > endif That was the format we used for other DNSBL rules like __RCVD_IN_ZEN and __RCVD_IN_SORBS, though both of those rules have check_rbl_sub() calls on those lookups that pay attention to non-lastexternal whereas the only dependencies of non-lastexternal __RCVD_IN_BRBL were in my sandbox. (In reply to comment #1) > The DNSBL_INDIRECT, DNSBL_INDIRECT_UNSAFE and DNSBL_INDIRECT_UNSAFE_2 > in sandbox/khopesh/20_khop_bl.cf might need reconsidering, as they > were using both the __RCVD_IN_BRBL as well as the RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT. The problem with those is that some quirk in the mass-check system prevents running certain rules too many times (presumably due to being deemed too expensive). A large number of my DNSBL tests have fallen into this category (another example is RCVD_IN_SPAMCOP, which limits hits to last-external). The last net run (with decent volume) was 20110709 (today's net run at http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20110725-r1150068-n has only 3254 hams at the moment, so I assume it is still processing). In that run, the only non-shipped DNSBL rule (or dependency) in 20_khop_bl.cf that was evaluated was T_RCVD_IN_NIX_SPAM (which we've already determined is incompatible with our testing process). http://ruleqa.spamassassin.org/20110709/?srcpath=20_khop_bl.cf Does anybody know of a good way to dig back to the last net run that had data for these rules? As Mark suspected, the removal of __RCVD_IN_BRBL makes my DNSBL_INDIRECT_* rules completely useless since they were there primarily to test the differences between __RCVD_IN_BRBL and RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT (Mark's edit turned that portion of these rules into A && !A). The two options are: 1. Scrap the DNSBL_INDIRECT_* rule experiments. 2. Return __RCVD_IN_BRBL as "nopublish" (assuming no issues via bug 6527). 3. Gimp the DNSBL_INDIRECT_* experiments by removing the BRBL portion. For now, I've checked in #3 as r1150904. #2 is ready to go (commented in aforementioned commit). -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
