From users-return-117346-archive-asf-public=cust-asf.ponee.io@spamassassin.apache.org Sun Feb 11 15:54:31 2018 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public@eu.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@eu.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by mx-eu-01.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493B418064E for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:54:31 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 39358160C4E; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:54:31 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 7EE3B160C36 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:54:30 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 43929 invoked by uid 500); 11 Feb 2018 14:54:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@spamassassin.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list users@spamassassin.apache.org Received: (qmail 43914 invoked by uid 99); 11 Feb 2018 14:54:28 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:54:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id E3B211A0A7A for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:54:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.012 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.012 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, URIBL_SBL=4, URIBL_SBL_A=0.1] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=junc.eu Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id z9teuFytD77o for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:54:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from linode.junc.eu (linode.junc.eu [176.58.121.172]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 6B5345F659 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:54:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.junc.eu (localhost.junc.eu [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.junc.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3C31BE192 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:54:19 +0000 (GMT) X-Spam-Rules_score: ALL_TRUSTED=-1,SHORTCIRCUIT=-0.0001 X-Spam-Rules_token: X-Spam-Relay-Country: X-Spam-Uri-Hosts: _URIHOSTS_ Received: from localhost.junc.eu (localhost.junc.eu [IPv6:::1]) by linode.junc.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DC1AA1BE0E1 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 14:54:18 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=junc.eu; s=default; t=1518360859; x=1518792859; bh=1StqSfpRlA5V08Vd7nX+5OF9DHfla5cMd7bCOmmLKD0=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=IVBFEmKfVvrX4RBTRv5Vx8GxZWDpAx46JygGnbxfXbrPhqu3UQo1RRo2QClKvldxd u5Jvwy5u6ms2lH9b4DdaQIjT7SaZuJzrqbrG5TLG5nsy2vaHXUmG1vJj+DZYqnm/0+ vI7IWtOezjSsGlKwhojAj2GxHSzSi2K43FU7dY3Q= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 15:54:18 +0100 From: Benny Pedersen To: users@spamassassin.apache.org Subject: Re: Barracuda Reputation Block List (BRBL) removal from the SA ruleset Organization: Jersore Underground Network Center In-Reply-To: References: <34073266-bd1c-174c-76e2-d862cc96f007@ena.com> <5cb08526351846083b96736f36a98996@junc.eu> <388aa5d1-260c-a601-293e-abae00043096@ena.com> <3cfd6a64-f1d0-ee43-a6b4-c2dea956660c@mcgrail.com> <0063a995856a7a60fbcf98f179a85b4d@junc.eu> Message-ID: <3e5d76d6813beed36c70d489205ac37c@junc.eu> X-Sender: me@junc.eu User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.7 X-PWhois-Status: No originator identified Dave Warren skrev den 2018-02-06 20:39: > How low are the TTLs? I'm seeing 300 seconds on 127.0.0.2 which is > more than sufficient time for a single message to finish processing, > such that multiple queries from one message would absolutely be cached > (or more likely, the first would still be pending and the second would > get the same answer as the first). first query would be valid for 300 secs, but that is imho still not free, problem is that keeping low ttls does not change how dns works, any auth dns servers will upate on soa serial anyway, the crime comes in when sa using remote dns servers that ignore soa serial updates in that case ttls would keep spammers listed for 300 secs only and thats why i say 300 secs helps spammers > ;; ANSWER SECTION: > 2.0.0.127.bb.barracudacentral.org. 300 IN A 127.0.0.2 > > Maybe the TTLs are different for other records? 300 is imho to low to anything thats called free i would like to accept free if it was 3600 > I am also noticing very intermittent response times, sometimes taking > over a second to get a response, other times taking under 50ms. rndc querylog is my friend i just like to start a debate on why 300 is accepted as free, it does matter for non datafeeds users, but for datafeeds it does not matter at all