A long time ago, I carefully read the descriptions of the RBL's from 
Spamcop.  My thoughts were that Spamcop's lists were useful in a scoring 
system, not for accept/deny usage as you are doing.  Feedback that I see 
from those having problems with Spamcop have just re-confirmed my thoughts.

I also use Barracudacentral and abuseat.org plus an inhouse RBL. I found 
a delay in listings at abuseat.org before spamhaus got them, so 
abuseat.org is useful for early detection.

Lyle Giese
LCR Computer Services, Inc.

On 6/10/2014 5:46 PM, David Camm wrote:
> interesting thing happened today.
>
> i got an email form one of my customer domain admins who said several 
> of his users were not able to receive emails from both hotmail and 
> gmail because we said:
>
> Final-Recipient: rfc822HIDDEN@....
> Action: failed
> Status: 5.5.0
> Diagnostic-Code: smtp;550 found in RBL (bl.spamcop.net)
>
> my current rbl list has:
>
> b.barracudacentral.org (deny)
> cbl.abuseat.org (deny)
> zen.spamhaus.org (deny)
> bl.spamcop.net (deny)
> list.dnswl.org (accept)
>
> what's the current best practice/thinking about rbls?
>
> should i get rid of spamcop? others? should i add others that i'm not 
> aware of?
>
> any advice would be greatly appreciated.
>
> david camm
> advanced web systems
> keller, tx
>
>