https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6220
--- Comment #29 from AXB <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #28) > With masschecks flowing smoothly once again, now is especially the time to > examine the performance of included vs. non-included DNSBL's. But yes, I do > agree it should be removed soon. > > http://www.spamtips.org/2011/05/dnsbl-safety-report-5142011.html > I'd like to do a similar analysis to this given the current masscheck > results, which would require 2-3 weeks with the newly expanded corpus. > However I am stretched too thin to work on this myself. I am just > suggesting that if this project intends to actually *do* anything useful > with the DNSBL masscheck results, someone else should examine safety levels > in a similar manner to these old reports. my last weekly masscheck took over 14 hours to run, I uploaded half a gig of logifiles, and next weeks's masscheck will be even larger so I don't feel like hammering BLs which we won't use. They also produce quite a bit of delay in processing, probably due to slow networks over the ponds. > I am also curious, was Mailspike ever included in the default SA rules, > perhaps for 3.4.x? Yes. it is included. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
