[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Every spam is sacred, back the first message



On Sat, Jun 14, 2003 at 04:05:54PM +0200, Santiago Vila wrote:
> 
> What I said is that there are good DNSBLs and bad DNSBLs.
> The DSBL (http://dsbl.org) is just one of them, one particularly good
> in terms of high number of messages rejected and low false positive rate,
> but I never said that all DNSBLs are as good as this one (see my
> comment about SPEWS, for example).
> 
> You continue to put all DNSBLs in the same bag. You should not judge
> DNSBLs in general, you should judge each of them separately.

Based on what? What are the rules they follow to add an IP? and to remove it?

There are many uncertainties, and I repeat:

I do not want to relay the power to decide if my IP is an open relay or not
into some elses hands. SpamAssassin is code that I can modify at will. RBLs
have their own rules, and I cannot modify/influence them.

J

-- 
Jesus Climent | Unix SysAdm | Helsinki, Finland | pumuki.hispalinux.es
GPG: 1024D/86946D69 BB64 2339 1CAA 7064 E429  7E18 66FC 1D7F 8694 6D69
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Registered Linux user #66350 proudly using Debian Sid & Linux 2.4.20

A man can convince anyone he's somebody else, but never himself.
		--Narrator (The usual suspects)



Reply to: