|Main Archive Page > Month Archives > spamassassin-users archives|
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