https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6668
Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |FIXED --- Comment #24 from Kevin A. McGrail <[email protected]> 2011-12-12 16:31:32 UTC --- > The reason for the special result code, as indicated in the posting referenced > above, is that REFUSED rcode will result in triple the amount of queries in > most cases. In the absence of a patch to implement your special return value (which I think needs to be outside of 127.X and should be discussed with other RBLs), I can only recommend that you simply blackhole the requests from servers in excess of 100K that you consider abusive. Additionally, as with Joao, I am also happy to support your project with a public nameserver. However, I can't support your policy that causes FPs in SA as I feel it is unrealistic to launch an RBL and not expect this type of problem. As of today, DNSWL will be disabled by default in SA's rules. SA Admins wishing to use it, should add something like this to your local.cf: #ENABLING DNSWL - BUG 6668 score RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 0 -0.0001 0 -0.0001 score RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 0 -0.7 0 -0.7 score RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED 0 -2.3 0 -2.3 score RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI 0 -5 0 -5 This disabling will be effective with the next rules update. However, please note that we are *very* open to discussing policy changes that will help maintain your project, it's success as a spam test and not cause FPs so that it could be re-enabled by default. Regards, KAM svn commit -m 'Changing scores of DNSWL due to FPs caused by their nameservers anti-abuse policies - Bug 6668' Sending rules/50_scores.cf Transmitting file data . Committed revision 1213299. -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
