On 12/12/2011 4:27 PM, Karsten Bräckelmann wrote:
On Mon, 2011-12-12 at 16:04 -0800, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
The text regarding high-use queries appeared on the website in
October 2010. Whether or not it's "enforced" by serving FP's to
excessive users is beside the point -
No, it is not. It is precisely the point, and the reason for disabling
DNSWL by default.
high-query users lost the right to use DNS as soon as that text
appeared. In other words the behavior of the whitelist at that
time changed from "everyone use us, please, commercial or
otherwise, the same way" to "some of you use us this way and others use
us that way" Knowing that SA was being used by both groups which
the whitelist was expecting different behavior from should have been
enough to turn off access to that list in the default config of SA.
No. SA should be usable out-of-the-box with best possible performance
for the majority of users.
Plus, sites processing way above 100,000 messages a day do have the
admin power and knowledge to take care of these. The majority of smaller
sites does not.
The serving FPs is tangential.
Again, no. It is the very reason to pull DNSWL by default. It is the
core of the decision.
then why is DNSWL the only one that had access turned on by default
originally?
Ted
