[Tools-discuss] Why is inline CSS editing on IETF mailing lists?

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Sun, 03 November 2019 21:09 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE901200D7 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:09:49 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=KxVK8qKF; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=XR/inkSr
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Faly5A-bvgx4 for <tools-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:09:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 207761200C4 for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 13:09:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5816C40B for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 16:09:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 03 Nov 2019 16:09:45 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=from :content-type:mime-version:subject:message-id:references:to :date; s=fm1; bh=gjZrVFYc/mGfmqi2rqhM7B0puFlcF9XQc64E+X9kWxM=; b= KxVK8qKFOISjcV6/+XTTT24D6ZGCmc6FuRt9J4SbmidcKsHhwcRyZ7hiubTPbsUk O9EQn210HSpypYId+V8io89HsnwsXpjNSC3rR0W2AT01dydekcYX3auYb8gphBL/ U9Svn/hslXNvyOQhfBCDFmAeH56W1EEvWUGNciHUaanQ/YI1NmQShXf+TjDjHrHh ulH5yjXyahpSM0/NaUe1lP1mqrAnB72PyalOfl7oS7O6w/kdCg63CxwB4gF4R72x OlMLLCc8IQNqWbHBA/cYfTOpYSYElioCRSoAw0LDg8MaslbR7aftAW/GTO/Bep92 vSvfm84PqLqt3w/AhdGvUA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=gjZrVFYc/mGfmqi2r qhM7B0puFlcF9XQc64E+X9kWxM=; b=XR/inkSrGtBAVb9l+ZyneIJo3dzT1xoF1 11uhakw7JinBLa61JtjZCYnS6uoKePFQ0pns12jXafxyS2qKL8MfLPECkSHW6AcY Fmeke3yw88lNQvN6fvtkDzma4Cs5rFfWsMp5J4D4xk9NIeLgRVkCHugyaPOLoF90 /i75K8A9X/0ukcOGa8NAkCH+vECSNp98qr6IfQsfzRSh8bRqfz3HrXHX3f998IAa PMnVbRm1nqu8i6cLpbNWjNQQNGNdwrXe1pHkg9rc8rHhT1P8RHNiJa6S8NX1nWCT 3IQcZlFkGKFfK7LBoswHesi6sIP1/vYu+nVRP/+d9TlGoVSrPWJOQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:GEK_XVf1FF2pBs3LLrynSIoce1QPgg7IuJWQG2b48uyx8SUH30W3Rg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedufedrudduuddgudeglecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfgh necuuegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhephfgtggfukfhfvfffofesrgdtmh erhhdtjeenucfhrhhomhepofgrrhhkucfpohhtthhinhhghhgrmhcuoehmnhhothesmhhn ohhtrdhnvghtqeenucffohhmrghinhepfiefrdhorhhgpdhgihhthhhusgdrtghomhdpih gvthhfrdhorhhgpdhmnhhothdrnhgvthenucfkphepudduledrudejrdduheekrddvhedu necurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvghtnecuvehluh hsthgvrhfuihiivgeptd
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:GEK_XQ0rQjEOgefzoMoSj5EbQgvthZpNU_d4UoiZj7pOwzTqkjklyg> <xmx:GEK_XUHITLkFcQouGM2X6ep7dS269F6ycFmdmi5ZmIP9u-c1qK0ywg> <xmx:GEK_XSm9ZJJqr0UdfBoaFDDrfgsTwxr-UnW72OjOyoaQbqAcPF7v3A> <xmx:GEK_XVyqjTWtOjvQcHnZiUmrCRSX05DlX_BRuXzfreC_0hijXX6IKw>
Received: from macbook-pro.mnot.net (unknown [119.17.158.251]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7E615306005B for <tools-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 3 Nov 2019 16:09:42 -0500 (EST)
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0E59873A-C47A-4889-B5CA-F58828F7242B"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3594.4.19\))
Message-Id: <0B32A612-6F45-48A1-96BC-28FCB247870B@mnot.net>
References: <20191103073305.BE125306005C@mailuser.nyi.internal>
To: tools-discuss@ietf.org
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2019 08:09:39 +1100
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3594.4.19)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tools-discuss/zIm5nasfq1zbyY_wkwwrbFR7P5U>
Subject: [Tools-discuss] Why is inline CSS editing on IETF mailing lists?
X-BeenThere: tools-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <tools-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tools-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:tools-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tools-discuss>, <mailto:tools-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Nov 2019 21:09:50 -0000

Hi,

I've noticed that mail sent to IETF lists appears to have its inline CSS edited; in the message below, an extra "." is prefixed onto these rules, with the effect that they aren't applied:

> ..repos { margin-bottom: 0; margin-top:0; line-height: 1.2; }
> ..new { color: red; }
> ..label { display: inline;
> 	padding: .2em .6em .3em;
> 	font-size: 75%;
> 	font-weight: 700;
> 	line-height: 1;
> 	color: #fff;
> 	text-align: center;
> 	white-space: nowrap;
> 	vertical-align: baseline;
> 	border-radius: .25em;
> }

Compare with <https://www.w3.org/mid/20191103073300.39B0780061@mailuser.nyi.internal>;.

Cheers,

> Begin forwarded message:
> 
> From: Repository Activity Summary Bot <do_not_reply@mnot.net>;
> Subject: Weekly github digest ( Activity Summary)
> Date: 3 November 2019 at 6:33:05 pm AEDT
> To: quic@ietf.org
> Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/1AuiZGyvn5u07O-obAlXV6-AooM>
> 
> Sunday November 03, 2019
> 
> Events without label "editorial"
> 
> Issues
> 
> quicwg/base-drafts (+1/-9/💬28)
> 1 issues created:
> 
> #3179 Duplicate NEW_TOKEN should only be on same connection <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3179> (by mikkelfj) 
> 5 issues received 28 new comments:
> 
> #3173 TLS MUST NOT deliver server 1RTT Rx keys until getting Finished <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3173> (10 by ghedo, kazuho, martinduke) -tls
> #3159 Server should not accept 1-RTT traffic before handshake completion <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3159> (11 by ad-l, ghedo, ianswett, mikkelfj) -tls
> #3155 The method of identifying "the same server" <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3155> (2 by kazuho, mikkelfj) -transport design proposal-ready
> #3151 loss detection timer description could be simplified by definining a timer mode <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3151> (4 by ianswett, janaiyengar, marten-seemann) -recovery
> #3135 allow sending PADDING after receiving a non-ack-eliciting packet <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3135> (1 by mnot) -transport
> 9 issues closed:
> 
> #3041 kMaxDatagramSize should use the PMTU rather than be fixed <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3041> -recovery design
> #2928 Lift single-packet ClientHello requirement? <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2928> -tls design has-consensus
> #2823 Do Initial secrets change after Retry packet? <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2823> -tls design has-consensus
> #3046 Handling of Retire Prior To field <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3046> -transport design has-consensus
> #3085 Stateless reset detection should be datagram-based <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3085> -transport design has-consensus
> #2152 Why does stateless reset have to be checked after MAC failure <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2152> -transport design has-consensus
> #3097 Is CONNECTION_CLOSE ACK-eliciting? <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/3097> -recovery -transport design has-consensus
> #2741 Re-visit initial keys discard <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2741> -tls -transport design has-consensus
> #2944 Layout of PreferredAddress <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/issues/2944> -transport design has-consensus
> Pull requests
> 
> quicwg/base-drafts (+3/-5/💬14)
> 3 pull requests submitted:
> 
> #3183 Limit CWND increase in slow start <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3183> (by ianswett) -recovery
> #3182 Add an enum indicating the timer_mode <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3182> (by ianswett) -recovery
> #3178 token-based greasing / initial packet protection (downgradable variant) <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3178> (by kazuho) 
> 8 pull requests received 14 new comments:
> 
> #3183 Limit CWND increase in slow start <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3183> (2 by ianswett, janaiyengar) -recovery
> #3182 Add an enum indicating the timer_mode <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3182> (2 by ianswett, marten-seemann) -recovery
> #3166 token-based greasing / initial packet protection <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3166> (1 by kazuho) -transport design
> #3120 Add retry integrity tag <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3120> (3 by kazuho, martinthomson, mikkelfj) -tls -transport
> #3099 Idle timeout indicates you will timeout <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3099> (1 by ianswett) -transport
> #3066 Change PTO to be per packet number space <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3066> (1 by marten-seemann) -recovery design
> #3050 Rewrite key update section <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3050> (3 by DavidSchinazi, martinthomson) -tls design
> #3042 Use the FRAME_ENCODING_ERROR for errors in frame encoding <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3042> (1 by martinthomson) -transport design
> 5 pull requests merged:
> 
> #3167 kMaxDatagramSize -> max_datagram_size <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3167> -recovery
> #3045 Allow ClientHello to span multiple QUIC packets <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3045> -tls
> #3096 MUST retire Connection IDs becoming stale <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3096> -transport design
> #2993 Stateless reset comparisons (constant time/any order/datagram) <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/2993> -transport design
> #3098 CONNECTION_CLOSE is non-ack-eliciting <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts/pull/3098> -recovery -transport design
> Repositories tracked by this digest:
> 
> https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts <https://github.com/quicwg/base-drafts>
--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/