On Wednesday, May 30, 2007 1:41 PM Theo Van Dinter wrote: > On Wed, May 30, 2007 at 12:33:16PM -0500, Daniel J McDonald wrote: >>> Well, that doesn't show up in the list either... > > I haven't really looked at 3.2 in a while, but the rule seems to have > a score 0. A random guess, without seeing the rest of your debug > output, is that URIBL_BLACK is marked as a duplicate of this other > rule (the config lines are identical), and so it gets removed.
Where does this leave us for a fix? Does a bug need to be filed? If so, what is the root of the cause? Is it the duplicate rule in 72_active.cf or that the duplicate has a score of 0? Jason A. Bertoch Network Administrator [EMAIL PROTECTED] ElectroNet Intermedia Consulting 3411 Capital Medical Blvd. Tallahassee, FL 32308 (V) 850.222.0229 (F) 850.222.8771
