spamassassin-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uh...@fantomas.sk>
Subject Re: TTL and DNSBLs [per-IP negative-cache TTL]
Date Thu, 07 Jul 2011 14:12:31 GMT
>"David F. Skoll" <dfs@roaringpenguin.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2011 11:50:44 +0200
>> Matus UHLAR - fantomas <uhlar@fantomas.sk> wrote:
>>
>>> Negative caching can be effective or in this case even
>>> ineffective too, can't it?
>>
>> The point is that by definition, you can't have a per-IP
>> negative-cache TTL.

On 07.07.11 15:31, Andrzej Adam Filip wrote:
>But it is possible to use a wildcard DNS record for "not listed",
>is not it? :-)

it can, but it would have no positive effect due to way how wildcards 
in DNS work.

>The question is: Would it be cost effective?

there would be a cost of returning positive answer instead of negative.

-- 
Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@fantomas.sk ; http://www.fantomas.sk/
Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address.
Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu.
    One OS to rule them all, One OS to find them, 
One OS to bring them all and into darkness bind them 

Mime
View raw message