feat: add 2026-03-04 weekly meeting notes (#23)
This commit is contained in:
parent
c1076f0387
commit
ad8a5d35dd
1 changed files with 102 additions and 0 deletions
102
meetings/2026-03-04_weekly.md
Normal file
102
meetings/2026-03-04_weekly.md
Normal file
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,102 @@
|
||||||
|
# 2026-03-04 Transports WG (Weekly)
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## TL;DR
|
||||||
|
The meeting, facilitated by Kurtis Van Gent and Mark Roth, focused on finalizing
|
||||||
|
imminent Specification Enhancement Proposals (SEPs) and discussing new protocol
|
||||||
|
extensions. The core maintainers reviewed SEP 2322 (MRTR) positively, agreeing
|
||||||
|
to accept SDK breaking changes in favor of the new stateless flow. SEP 2243
|
||||||
|
(HTTP Standardization) is undergoing a final revote after consolidating header
|
||||||
|
names and softening intermediary error handling. Significant debate occurred
|
||||||
|
regarding the Data Layer Sessions proposal, resulting in a mandate to explicitly
|
||||||
|
define targeted use cases before further design review. Andreas Schlapbach
|
||||||
|
introduced a new content negotiation proposal for compact responses to support
|
||||||
|
local LLMs with small context windows. Finally, the group reviewed remaining
|
||||||
|
gaps for the June release.w
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Detailed Summary
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Process & Roadmap
|
||||||
|
* **June Release Gaps:** Kurtis Van Gent identified two main gaps for the
|
||||||
|
upcoming specification release: pluggable transports and caching/optimization.
|
||||||
|
* **Pluggable Transports:** Mark Roth clarified that pluggable transports mostly
|
||||||
|
require SDK work, not SEP changes. Minor cosmetic updates to loosen the
|
||||||
|
JSON-RPC requirement might be needed. Stephen Halter emphasized the need to
|
||||||
|
ensure the transport abstraction still allows for JSON-RPC to support existing
|
||||||
|
proxy implementations.
|
||||||
|
* **Caching & Standard IO:** Caching and optimization lack volunteers and will
|
||||||
|
likely be deferred until after the June release. Standard IO updates are also
|
||||||
|
firmly out of scope for the current revision.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Technical Decisions: MRTR & Tasks (SEP 2322)
|
||||||
|
* **Core Maintainer Feedback:** Mark Roth reported that the core maintainers
|
||||||
|
gave positive feedback on the Ephemeral Multi-Round Trip Request (MRTR) SEP.
|
||||||
|
Minor schema changes were added to help SDKs discriminate between tool call
|
||||||
|
responses and incomplete responses.
|
||||||
|
* **URL-Based Elicitation:** The group agreed that the URL-based elicitation
|
||||||
|
workflow is incompatible with the ephemeral workflow and will be restricted to
|
||||||
|
the persistent (tasks) workflow.
|
||||||
|
* **Backward Compatibility:** The consensus was to accept breaking changes in
|
||||||
|
the SDKs to implement the new MRTR flow, deferring backward compatibility
|
||||||
|
concerns unless significant user complaints arise.
|
||||||
|
* **Task Integration:** Luca Chang confirmed that their task-related proposals
|
||||||
|
(including "jump scares" and "task continue") are inextricably tied to MRTR
|
||||||
|
and will be pursued under the Transports Working Group.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Technical Decisions: HTTP Standardization (SEP 2243)
|
||||||
|
* **Proposal Updates:** Mike Kistler outlined recent changes to the SEP, which
|
||||||
|
is up for a revote. Header names (`tool name`, `resource name`, `prompt name`)
|
||||||
|
were consolidated into a single `MCP name` header. The payload encoding was
|
||||||
|
explicitly specified as the Base64 encoding of the UTF-8 value.
|
||||||
|
* **Intermediary Handling:** The requirement for intermediaries was softened so
|
||||||
|
that if they reject a request based solely on header values (e.g., bad
|
||||||
|
encoding), they can return a standard `400` HTTP error instead of a JSON-RPC
|
||||||
|
error. Stephen Halter noted that a `404` should be explicitly avoided to
|
||||||
|
prevent ending the session.
|
||||||
|
* **Header Limits:** Following a discussion initiated by Stephen Halter about
|
||||||
|
protocol limits, the group agreed to remove strict protocol-level limits on
|
||||||
|
header lengths. These limits will be replaced with a design note advising
|
||||||
|
application authors against promoting overly long parameters to headers.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Technical Decisions: Data Layer Sessions
|
||||||
|
* **Defining Use Cases:** Mark Roth strongly emphasized that the sessions SEP
|
||||||
|
cannot proceed without a concrete list of targeted use cases. Scenarios like
|
||||||
|
"session per tool call" are mutually exclusive with "retaining state across
|
||||||
|
tool calls".
|
||||||
|
* **Scope of State:** Shaun Smith argued that sessions should manage opaque,
|
||||||
|
application-layer state (e.g., associating a chat thread with a sandbox)
|
||||||
|
rather than MCP protocol state. Peter Alexander challenged this, asking if the
|
||||||
|
LLM model should be in control of the session state instead of the
|
||||||
|
application.
|
||||||
|
* **Concurrency:** Stephen Halter raised concerns about state synchronization
|
||||||
|
during parallel tool calls. Shaun Smith clarified that the proposal currently
|
||||||
|
uses a "last write wins" strategy to intentionally discourage high-stakes
|
||||||
|
strict ordering, advising it be used for low-stakes storage.
|
||||||
|
* **Next Steps:** The group agreed to hold a special session next week to review
|
||||||
|
an updated document focused on use cases and design, which will inform a final
|
||||||
|
recommendation to the core maintainers (including the potential recommendation
|
||||||
|
to drop sessions entirely).
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
### Proposals: Content Negotiation
|
||||||
|
* **Compact Responses:** Andreas Schlapbach proposed a two-phase content
|
||||||
|
negotiation extension (similar to HTTP `Accept`) allowing clients with small
|
||||||
|
context windows (like local LLMs on mobile devices) to request "compact"
|
||||||
|
responses from servers.
|
||||||
|
* **Protocol vs. Application Layer:** Simon Russell and Kurtis Van Gent
|
||||||
|
questioned why this negotiation needs to live at the protocol layer instead of
|
||||||
|
just passing expressive parameters within individual tool calls. Andreas
|
||||||
|
argued that an upfront session-level negotiation reduces chattiness and
|
||||||
|
compute waste. Andreas will continue to refine the proposal and gather
|
||||||
|
feedback in the repository.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
## Action Items
|
||||||
|
- [ ] **Shaun Smith** to update the Sessions document by Friday/Saturday,
|
||||||
|
focusing on defining use cases and the argument for keeping sessions at the
|
||||||
|
application layer rather than the model layer.
|
||||||
|
- [ ] **Shaun Smith** to check availability for a special session next Tuesday
|
||||||
|
or Friday to discuss the updated session document.
|
||||||
|
- [ ] **Shaun Smith & Kurtis Van Gent** to work together to ensure the Sessions
|
||||||
|
SEP explicitly outlines the context for application versus transport sessions.
|
||||||
|
- [ ] **Mike Kistler** to update SEP 2243 to replace the strict limits on header
|
||||||
|
lengths with an implementation note/design guidance.
|
||||||
|
- [ ] **Kurtis Van Gent** to follow up with Kryspin and Stephen Halter to
|
||||||
|
formulate a formal proposal/plan for pluggable transports.
|
||||||
Loading…
Reference in a new issue