https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/show_bug.cgi?id=6247

--- Comment #10 from J.D. Falk <[email protected]> 2009-12-04 15:08:53 UTC 
---
(In reply to comment #8)
> One of the tasks I have been struggling with is developing a policy for rules
> that implement query volume limits in default installation.  
> 
> I am by no means anti-commercial applications but I will tell you that the
> issue of implementing rules by default that might have query limits has been
> discussed.

*nod*  I wish we could give a blanket exception to SpamAssassin, but there's no
reliable way to differentiate between queries.

> When you say next year, can you be more specific?

Unfortunately, no -- the work's not scheduled yet.

> Also, if a query limit is reached, will your service timeout, return false
> negatives, false positives, ??

I can promise we won't return anything false.  Beyond that, I'm not sure yet.

(In reply to comment #9)
> But we will not add a new blacklist with a non-informational score right 
> before
> the release.  For example, PSBL went through months of testing in weekly
> masscheck before it became enabled for the upcoming 3.3.0 release.

Totally understandable.

> Also, do you really intend for RNBL to be not lastexternal?  That seems to 
> have
> always been a mistake with other blacklists.

Our RNBL model won't blacklist a dynamic IP (for example) simply because it's
dynamic; we have to have seen spam from it recently, as well.  But if you're
concerned, we'll certainly bow to your experience.

-- 
Configure bugmail: 
https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to