@MrAdministrator I second this. 

  @MrAdministrator 

I think its silly that it’s been a year since the EAP783 was released and it still doesn't have AFC support. But for some reason they are coming out with firmware updates for an unreleased Omada EAP772 outdoor to enable AFC. Every time I email TP-Link i get told I need to make a request for it to be added to the EAP783 otherwise it never will be. Well, that makes no sense considering you have a device that isn't available to the public yet so how exactly can someone make a request for something that isn't even available yet. Yet you have a device that has been out for a year and people are continually asking for AFC, yet they get told there is no future plan for that. I really think TP-Link needs to get their priorities in line.  

  @bramezan 

It's pretty frustrating for sure. Especially for a flagship device. 

I will note that on March 13, they posted an AFC help article which has a section about "Which Omada APs support AFC?" Which says this:

Which Omada APs support AFC?

Currently, only EAP772-Outdoor supports AFC; all the other 6GHz Wi-Fi7 models will support it in the future. (The support plan may be fine-tuned; please pay attention to the firmware’s release note, which will introduce the specific changes.)

Odd that support can't get their story straight about whether or not it will be added. 

  @MrAdministrator 

I saw that myself but the below email was exchanged just last night.

"The EAP772-Outdoor is scheduled for release Q2 this year.  I can't say why a feature would be available for a device that is still unreleased.  That is a decision made at a higher level than mine.  While at this time there are no plans to add that feature to the EAP783 you can submit this request on our business community at the link below."

https://community.tp-link.com/en/business/forum/4

To me if you really wanted to fine tune AFC they would do it on a device that is already released and not one that the public can't even test.

  @bramezan 

My best guess would be that the EAP783/773 being indoor APs received FCC approval for their non-AFC workaround with the idea that building walls attenuate the signal enough there's little chance of interfering with higher priority traffic.

An outdoor AP, however, has nothing to attenuate its signal and therefore has a much higher chance of interfering with higher priority traffic so an FCC approval without AFC might have been out of the question.

Essentially I think theyre debuting AFC on the EAP772 Outdoor because theyre being forced to.

On the bright side, once they have a working, FCC compliant/approved implementation it should be much easier to add support to the existing APs.