Top
Best
New

Posted by xmddmx 1 day ago

Outlook.com is rejecting email from domains without DMARC(mailroute.net)
494 points | 336 commentspage 4
cloudie78 1 day ago|
DMARC has been around for a while now. I know it’s fashionable to bash on Micro$oft and they rightfully deserve it.

Just not for this.

Krei-se 1 day ago||
You can hate on outlook.com for a couple of reasons.

But this is not one of them.

jmuguy 7 hours ago|
Seriously, in fact I would say this is rare instance of Microsoft handling email in a way that makes sense.
ourmandave 1 day ago||
What if I include the header string, "DMARC and Jalad at Tanagra."
protocolture 23 hours ago|
DKIM, its signature verified.
M2Ys4U 12 hours ago||
SPF when the alignment fell
Beijinger 21 hours ago||
Stop bitching guys, you have never dealt with t-online.de (T-Mobile)

https://telekomhilft-telekom-de.translate.goog/conversations...

cowlevel 18 hours ago|
Deutsche Telekom is a regional monopoly that abuses its position in every possible way. It's like Comcast but even worse. Best thing you can do is forget they exist and if someone really wants to contact you they'll find another way.
27bstroke6 1 day ago||
I’ve been anticipating something like this for a while; the number of folks who don’t have their email-related DNS settings in order is remarkably high.
stavros 1 day ago||
I was hit by this twenty minutes ago. I don't disagree with the policy, but I wish my provider had warned me so I could add the headers. I already had DKIM and SPF, but not DMARC.
schappim 21 hours ago||
Didn't gmail already roll the same thing out in 2024?
shevy-java 12 hours ago||
> That rule is aimed at marketers and bulk senders, and most small businesses rightly assumed it didn't apply to them.

This would be naive. It currently means that Microsoft censors and decides what you can see in the first place. I do not recall having given Microsoft such a permission. On the other hand I don't use Microsoft for email anyway (though, unfortunately, one local university here does, which is super-annoying. Europe is unable to think strategically here).

aetherspawn 1 day ago||
If BIMI was in any way scalable it would actually provide a way for an external signer to say “yeah we trust these guys, you should deliver this”.

I haven’t really seen BIMI for less than practically $1000/year and most clients still don’t check it.

alfiedotwtf 14 hours ago|
It’s 2026.. having been at a few email companies for years, this time I would agree with Outlook on this one
More comments...