> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009, Arvid Picciani wrote: >> rich...@buzzhost.co.uk wrote: >>> It comes with great sadness that I have to announce the imminent >>> closure of SORBS. >> crap ... sorbs is the only list I trust enough to have them at SMTP level.
On 22.06.09 13:54, Charles Gregory wrote: > In the past, I did some tests to determine which lists caught the most > spam without FP's, and found that sbl-xbl.spamhaus.org (not the full > 'zen' rbl), was catching over 90% of spam. 1. sbl-xbl is obsolete and may be removed in the near future. 2. Why not zen? > I also use njabl, though > lately it looks like it mostly overlaps with spamhaus, but the 'web' and > 'dul' lists from sorbs are still catching a couple of 100 spam each day > that were not caught by spamhaus. So I would really hate to see SORBS go. 3. the dul.njabl.org is obsolete and should not be used. It was imported to pbl.spamhaus.org and stopped being maintained. PBL is contained in zen. - Again, why not zen? > IMPORTANT: If sorbs does not get picked-up by a new host, will SA > developers be ready to roll-out an SA update to remove the sorbs rules, > so that we don't suffer a bunch of timeouts? Or how does that work? -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uh...@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. It's now safe to throw off your computer.
