Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Gemini as a protocol for the WARC-Protocol field #85

Closed
acidus99 opened this issue May 31, 2023 · 1 comment
Closed

Gemini as a protocol for the WARC-Protocol field #85

acidus99 opened this issue May 31, 2023 · 1 comment

Comments

@acidus99
Copy link

acidus99 commented May 31, 2023

Protocol name

Gemini

Protocol identifier

"gemini"

(By design, the Gemini spec has no version numbers)

Specification URL (optional)

https://gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/specification.gmi
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gemini_(protocol)

There are some existent WARCs containing Gemini traffic on the Internet Archive as well:
https://archive.org/details/mozz-gemini-crawl-2020-1
https://archive.org/details/mozz-gemini-crawl-2020-2
https://archive.org/details/mozz-gemini-crawl-2020-3

Other

Gemini is a simple application protocol similar to HTTP/0.9, that runs on top of TLS. There exists around 3000 servers, and ~1M URLs. I run one of the search engine for it, with a crawler that generates WARC files, which are then consumed by the search index as well as a Wayback Machine-style archive.

If I understand the WARC-Protocol proposal correctly, because Gemini runs on top of TLS, implementers would use 2 WARC-Protocol fields like this:

WARC-Protocol: tls/1.3
WARC-Protocol: gemini
@acidus99 acidus99 changed the title Gemini as a protocol for the WARC-Protocol header Gemini as a protocol for the WARC-Protocol field May 31, 2023
@ato
Copy link
Member

ato commented Jun 2, 2023

Thanks! I've added Gemini to the definitions in the WARC-Protocol proposal (#42).

@ato ato closed this as completed Jun 2, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants