spamassassin-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
Subject [Bug 6634] Remove __RCVD_IN_BRBL
Date Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:55:18 GMT

Adam Katz <> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
                 CC|                            |

--- Comment #2 from Adam Katz <> 2011-07-25 20:55:18 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> There seems to be a full-external check of, which I
> think was mistakenly not removed when bug 5984 was closed and
> RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT was implemented:
> ifplugin Mail::SpamAssassin::Plugin::DNSEval
> header __RCVD_IN_BRBL   eval:check_rbl('brbl','')
> tflags __RCVD_IN_BRBL   net
> endif

That was the format we used for other DNSBL rules like __RCVD_IN_ZEN and
__RCVD_IN_SORBS, though both of those rules have check_rbl_sub() calls on those
lookups that pay attention to non-lastexternal whereas the only dependencies of
non-lastexternal __RCVD_IN_BRBL were in my sandbox.

(In reply to comment #1)
> in sandbox/khopesh/ might need reconsidering, as they
> were using both the __RCVD_IN_BRBL as well as the RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT.

The problem with those is that some quirk in the mass-check system prevents
running certain rules too many times (presumably due to being deemed too
expensive).  A large number of my DNSBL tests have fallen into this category
(another example is RCVD_IN_SPAMCOP, which limits hits to last-external).

The last net run (with decent volume) was 20110709 (today's net run at has only 3254 hams at the
moment, so I assume it is still processing).  In that run, the only non-shipped
DNSBL rule (or dependency) in that was evaluated was
T_RCVD_IN_NIX_SPAM (which we've already determined is incompatible with our
testing process).

Does anybody know of a good way to dig back to the last net run that had data
for these rules?

As Mark suspected, the removal of __RCVD_IN_BRBL makes my DNSBL_INDIRECT_*
rules completely useless since they were there primarily to test the
differences between __RCVD_IN_BRBL and RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT (Mark's edit turned
that portion of these rules into A && !A).

The two options are:

1. Scrap the DNSBL_INDIRECT_* rule experiments.
2. Return __RCVD_IN_BRBL as "nopublish" (assuming no issues via bug 6527).
3. Gimp the DNSBL_INDIRECT_* experiments by removing the BRBL portion.

For now, I've checked in #3 as r1150904.  #2 is ready to go (commented in
aforementioned commit).

Configure bugmail:
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.

View raw message