Re: Wiki page for BLs updated (Was: Concerned with scores for from rfc-ignorant.org)

[Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>]

Jo Rhett wrote:
> On the "walk the way you talk" point, I have edited the DNSBL wiki
> page to include a list of all the DNSBLs in 20_dnsbl_tests.cf, instead
> of the previous comment about "all of the public DNSBLs" which isn't
> really true.
>
> This could probably use some more editing, so everyone is encouraged
> to fix any mistakes I made.
>
> Jo Rhett wrote: 
Personally I think you mis-read the original text. I don't think it was
meant to imply that SA supported "all public DNSBLs".

By "All of the free BL services are enabled by default."  I believe the
original author was not trying to say SA supported all BL services, but
that all of the free ones it does support are enabled by default.

I might consider re-integrating that statement, perhaps with some revision.

It also might be a good idea to include a link to the exact wiki page
you changed, so folks don't have to go searching to find it.

http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists

Re: Wiki page for BLs updated (Was: Concerned with scores for from rfc-ignorant.org)

[Jo Rhett <jr...@netconsonance.com>]

Matt Kettler wrote:
> Any  interpretation that it was intended to in any way define a list, is
> a misinterpretation. There's no undefined pointer, because there's no
> pointer.
	...		...
> The modified entry merely states that support for all these RBLs is
> built-in, but it leaves the question of 'how do I turn it on?'
> unanswered, something the original entry did answer.

Then fix it as I suggested.  I think you're overthinking my response.  I 
tried to add some useful content, that's all.

> I'd agree that would be good to add.. AFAIK there's only one BL that's
> ever been dropped from SA for any reason other than the RBL shut down
> operations. That's Spews. Spews sucks as a spam-detection method.
> 
>  All the others that I know of that got dropped were dropped after the
> RBL shut down.

I don't know that anyone cares.  I don't.  But I would have appreciate 
the active list that I put up there :-)


-- 
Jo Rhett
Network/Software Engineer
Net Consonance

Re: Wiki page for BLs updated (Was: Concerned with scores for from rfc-ignorant.org)

[Matt Kettler <mk...@verizon.net>]

Jo Rhett wrote:
> Matt Kettler wrote:
>> By "All of the free BL services are enabled by default."  I believe the
>> original author was not trying to say SA supported all BL services, but
>> that all of the free ones it does support are enabled by default.
>
> So... it said that all of a *undefined list* are used?  That's a
> delimiter of an undefined pointer or NULL, which is ... uh, NULL.
Any  interpretation that it was intended to in any way define a list, is
a misinterpretation. There's no undefined pointer, because there's no
pointer.

Yes, "what RBLs are suported" is a natural follow-on question, and one
that wasn't answered, but the old entry wasn't trying to answer that.

Your original complaint was the wiki implied that SA used ALL free BLs.
That's not what the original wiki was meant to say. Pure, simple.

It was merely telling users that various unspecified free RBLs are on by
default, and you don't have to do anything to turn them on. Nothing more.
>
> That's why I added the list.
I agree, it's good to have the list. It fleshes things out.

That said, it's probably also good to say something like this at the
top: "All the free BL services listed below are enabled by default.
MAPS, is disabled by default as it is not free for all situations.".

Which is why I suggested re-integrating the statement. I don't think
your additions are bad, but I think you also removed valuable content
that was in the original.  It's important to say that you don't have to
do anything special to turn these on, they're on by default.

The modified entry merely states that support for all these RBLs is
built-in, but it leaves the question of 'how do I turn it on?'
unanswered, something the original entry did answer.

>
> It really should be expanded to indicate any BLs which were added or
> dropped in various versions, and probably spell out the explicit names
> that people should enable or disable.  Then it would be Good
> Documentation :-)
>
I'd agree that would be good to add.. AFAIK there's only one BL that's
ever been dropped from SA for any reason other than the RBL shut down
operations. That's Spews. Spews sucks as a spam-detection method.

 All the others that I know of that got dropped were dropped after the
RBL shut down.

That said, I could be wrong.

Re: Wiki page for BLs updated (Was: Concerned with scores for from rfc-ignorant.org)

[Jo Rhett <jr...@netconsonance.com>]

Matt Kettler wrote:
> By "All of the free BL services are enabled by default."  I believe the
> original author was not trying to say SA supported all BL services, but
> that all of the free ones it does support are enabled by default.

So... it said that all of a *undefined list* are used?  That's a 
delimiter of an undefined pointer or NULL, which is ... uh, NULL.

That's why I added the list.

It really should be expanded to indicate any BLs which were added or 
dropped in various versions, and probably spell out the explicit names 
that people should enable or disable.  Then it would be Good 
Documentation :-)

-- 
Jo Rhett
Network/Software Engineer
Net Consonance