David Carney

Now, in my experience with these kinds of standards,

There's usually this explosion and then things coalesce to something a lot more sane.

I think that is going to happen with MCP.

It's just going to take us more time than we thought.

Oh, dynamic client registration, DCR.

And I will admit, I don't know all the technical details of this.

So you'll have to forgive me on it.

It basically lets things like MCP clients and servers wake up and register themselves against an endpoint without requiring a lot of manual steps or human interaction.

So it removes a lot of friction in terms of getting things like MCP deployed across an organization.

And you needed to support that, and that's why you went that route.

Yeah, well, MCP was calling for it.

And so it was like, well, this is where the spec is going.

And there's other parts of OAuth 2.1 and even some experimental stuff and a few RFCs that people were referring to.

Dynamic client registration was definitely one that a lot of people were talking about and were like, look, we can build this.

It's not exactly rocket science.

It would be hard for an existing identity provider to retrofit this in because being an identity provider is a horrendous amount of work.

Tailscale doesn't want to be an IDP.

We've known that from day one, but we can extend the functionality of existing ones.

And DCR was pretty straightforward for us, largely because with Tailscale, you know the identity of things on the network.

So if you have this trust and these assertions you can make in terms of who is connecting to what, then client registration becomes a lot more straightforward that way.