https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6724
--- Comment #15 from Karsten Bräckelmann <[email protected]> 2011-12-13 20:10:50 UTC --- Hmm, I don't like the idea of maintaining a set a negated scores. The following approach avoids this. Also, we really only need a single BLOCKED indicator rule, not three. urirhssub URIBL_BLOCKED multi.uribl.com. A 255 meta URIBL_$(color) __URIBL_$(color) && ! URIBL_BLOCKED Plus, of course, rename the current rules to make them non-scoring sub-rules as used in the above meta. An alternative to the meta rule method above, the existing urirhssub rules might simply be changed to use another available option as subtype, instead of the current bitmask. Particularly, if a single URI will not be listed in multiple colors, an exact dot-quad would do easily instead of the bitmask. Just avoid the rules triggering on the BLOCKED value. Exclude that, don't add more rules to negate scores. An additional benefit is, that along with the BLOCKED rule hitting, the admins might eventually wonder why the DNSBL itself never hits. (The approach with negative scores will make the DNSBL appear to be stunningly effective glimpsing over the stats.) -- Configure bugmail: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug.
