Skip to content

SEP-2351: Explicitly specify RFC 8414 well-known URI suffix for MCP#2351

Merged
mcp-commander[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
den/rfc-8414
Mar 28, 2026
Merged

SEP-2351: Explicitly specify RFC 8414 well-known URI suffix for MCP#2351
mcp-commander[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
den/rfc-8414

Conversation

@dend
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@dend dend commented Mar 4, 2026

Summary

  • Explicitly state that MCP uses the default oauth-authorization-server well-known URI suffix defined in RFC 8414 Section 3.1, satisfying the RFC's requirement that applications specify their well-known URI suffix
  • Clarify that MCP does not define an application-specific well-known URI suffix

Fixes #1650

Test plan

  • Verify the draft spec renders correctly with npm run serve:docs
  • Confirm no new broken links introduced by changes

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

Clarify that MCP uses the default oauth-authorization-server
well-known URI suffix per RFC 8414 Section 3.1, satisfying the
RFC requirement that applications specify their well-known URI
suffix. MCP does not define an application-specific suffix.

Fixes #1650
@dend dend requested a review from a team as a code owner March 4, 2026 21:58
@dend dend changed the title docs: explicitly specify RFC 8414 well-known URI suffix for MCP SEP-2351: Explicitly specify RFC 8414 well-known URI suffix for MCP Mar 4, 2026
@dend dend self-assigned this Mar 4, 2026
@dend dend added this to the 2026-06-30-RC milestone Mar 4, 2026
@dend dend added SEP draft SEP proposal with a sponsor. labels Mar 4, 2026
@dend dend moved this to In Review in SEP Review Pipeline Mar 4, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@pcarleton pcarleton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a pretty minor change, so seems fine, but in practice is this holding anyone back?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@wdawson wdawson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@sep-automation-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Maintainer Activity Check

Hi @dend!

You're assigned to this SEP but there hasn't been any activity from you in 18 days.

Please provide an update on:

  • Current status of your review/work
  • Any blockers or concerns
  • Expected timeline for next steps

If you're no longer able to sponsor this SEP, please let us know so we can find another maintainer.


This is an automated message from the SEP lifecycle bot.

@localden
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

/lgtm force

SEP approved by Core Maintainer vote.

@mcp-commander mcp-commander Bot added accepted SEP accepted by core maintainers, but still requires final wording and reference implementation. and removed draft SEP proposal with a sponsor. labels Mar 28, 2026
@mcp-commander mcp-commander Bot moved this from In Review to Accepted in SEP Review Pipeline Mar 28, 2026
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@mcp-commander mcp-commander Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Approved on behalf of @localden via /lgtm force.

@mcp-commander mcp-commander Bot enabled auto-merge (squash) March 28, 2026 01:43
@mcp-commander mcp-commander Bot merged commit 298498d into main Mar 28, 2026
21 checks passed
@mcp-commander mcp-commander Bot deleted the den/rfc-8414 branch March 28, 2026 01:43
@mcp-virtual-tpm mcp-virtual-tpm Bot modified the milestone: 2026-06-30-RC Apr 17, 2026
@localden localden assigned localden and unassigned dend Apr 27, 2026
@localden localden added final SEP finalized. and removed accepted SEP accepted by core maintainers, but still requires final wording and reference implementation. labels Jun 4, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

Status: Accepted

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

MCP doesn't sufficiently specify its integration with RFC 8414

4 participants