Summary

  • Anatel’s September 2026 drafts would make outdoor Standard Power Wi-Fi depend on an authorized AFC system that checks device location against the agency’s incumbent-station database.
  • The proposals allow multiple AFC operators and require advance notice and a customer migration window when one plans to close, but they do not promise uninterrupted service or define a common handoff of device state.

Spectrum plans are often presented as a choice about who may use a band. Anatel’s two consultations ask a more operational question about the lower 6 GHz range: how can outdoor Wi-Fi use higher power while protecting radio systems already there? The answer in the drafts is a service chain. A fixed access point gives an Automated Frequency Coordination (AFC) system its location and antenna details; the system compares those inputs with incumbent-station records and returns the channels and maximum power allowed for that place and period.

The proposals are still open for comment. Consultation 41 covers equipment requirements and test procedures for Standard Power Wi-Fi devices with AFC. Consultation 42 covers the AFC system itself, including its registration with Anatel, operational controls and testing. The agency says the model could support public spaces, industry, logistics, utilities, rural areas and other outdoor uses. Those are possible applications; the consultation papers do not establish that a network has been deployed or that a service outcome has improved. The public dashboard lists 3 December 2026 as the closing date for both consultations. (Anatel’s announcement; Consultations 41 and 42)

In the proposed arrangement, devices would not receive a permanent slice of spectrum. They must register with an Anatel-authorized AFC provider before transmitting, use only the frequencies and power returned for their coordinates, and seek a new authorization if registered parameters change. The AFC system, in turn, must refresh its copy of Anatel’s technical and administrative database daily. That database supplies information about incumbent radio links that the calculation is meant to protect. A returned channel is neither reserved nor exclusive. (Consultation 41; Consultation 42)

The drafts use several different clocks, and they govern different failures. If Anatel’s database becomes unavailable, the AFC system must retry every four hours. After 12 hours without a successful request, its operator must report the problem to Anatel. The system may use its latest database copy for up to seven days, unless the agency orders otherwise; after that, it needs express authorization to keep operating. Anatel can order it to stop earlier.

A Wi-Fi device has its own rule: it must check with AFC at least every 24 hours, but may keep operating until 23:59 on the day after losing contact; then it must stop until it receives current permission. A seven-day allowance for an AFC system’s data and a next-day limit for a device are not the same fallback.

The exit rule addresses a different event again. Anatel’s draft allows multiple registered AFC operators and says registration gives none an exclusive area, frequency or access point. Shared outdoor Wi-Fi infrastructure may use different AFC systems, and the calculation cannot favour one connected provider’s users over another’s. If an AFC operator plans to close, it must tell Anatel 90 days in advance and inform customers early enough to migrate to another operator. The operator remains responsible for the whole system even if contractors provide some of its functions. (Consultation 42)

That is a continuity design, but not yet a continuity guarantee. The proposal sets reporting, stale-data and planned-exit duties; it does not state a general availability target or specify a common process for transferring each device’s registration and reauthorization to a replacement AFC system. It also does not show test results from an operating Brazilian AFC service. Until the rules are finalized and operators are registered, the practical handoff remains an open question: can a network switch its frequency-coordination provider without losing authority to transmit?

Sources