19–25 October 2026. Two working-group meetings carried the week: SA2#177 agreed interim 6G core principles but left the architecture choice to SA2#178 in Calgary, while RAN1#126-bis settled parts of 6G cell search and deferred larger radio questions to November.

At the meetings

  • RAN1#126-bis (South Korea, 12–16 October 2026). RAN1 fixed the slot structure of the 6G synchronization block, made four-step random access the baseline and dropped a low-PAPR scheme for 16QAM. SSB length, default period and whether one transport block may span 400 MHz were deferred to RAN1#127 in November. Our report
  • SA2#177 (Prague, 12–16 October 2026). SA2 approved interim principles on NAS, migration, voice, QoS and the data framework. It did not choose among the three candidate 6G core architectures; that decision moves to SA2#178 in Calgary, with informal polls showing company positions. Our report

How the industry reads it

Selected press and company statements with our reading. These are claims by the named source, not 3GPP decisions.

Keysight and Docomo: 6G core architecture still not agreed

Keysight's Stephen Douglas said the 6G core architecture and network functions are not agreed and many proposed functions remain in study, while also saying commercial systems could arrive in the second half of 2029. Docomo's Bahador Bakhshi said the study covers 22 solution variants. The editor notes that a test-equipment vendor profits from an early date, so 2029 is the most optimistic point in the range, while the 22-variant figure matches the SA2 study and can be checked.

Source: Keysight (Stephen Douglas) and Docomo Euro-Labs (Bahador Bakhshi), at the RCR 6G Forum (vendor): rcrwireless.com

Qualcomm: constellation shaping out of Rel-21, 1024-QAM uplink only for FWA

Five weeks after the Madrid plenary, Qualcomm described the outcome: no consensus on probabilistic shaping for the first 6G release, and uplink 1024-QAM approved only for FWA devices. Further migration paths beyond 6G SA with MRSS were pushed to December. The editor reads this as a pattern: wherever chipmakers and operators disagreed on benefit, a feature was cut or delayed, not a tidy evolution of proven foundations.

Source: Qualcomm (OnQ blog) (vendor): pubt.io

Téral: no dedicated 6G core needed, fragmentation risk

Téral argued that existing 5G core functions would suffice and that spectrum disputes and geopolitics raise the risk of a fragmented global standard. The editor sees a minority position that runs against SA2 work and Ericsson, Nokia and Keysight, but a useful counterweight: all three candidate architectures assume a new core, and it is worth asking why no participant publicly considers the no-new-core option.

Source: Téral Research, analyst Stéphane Téral (RCR 6G Forum) (analyst): rcrwireless.com

NTN roaming and load sharing between satellite operators has no standard

Speakers said no standard exists for roaming and load sharing across multiple NTN providers, so non-standard integration with the mobile operator is needed. Release 21 is meant to remove the terminal's dependence on a GNSS fix. The editor calls this a concrete, verifiable specification gap and notes that attendees treat it as commercial although it looks technical.

Source: RCR Wireless, NTN Integration Forum (Verizon, MSSA, VIAVI, Rohde & Schwarz) (press): rcrwireless.com

What's next

  • Next working group meetings: 16–20 November 2026 in Calgary (CT1#164, CT3#150, CT4#138, RAN1#127, RAN2#136, RAN3#134, RAN4#121, RAN5#113, SA1#116, SA2#178, SA3#131, SA4#138, SA5#170, SA6#76, CT6#128).
  • Next plenaries: CT#114 (Boston, 7–8 December 2026); RAN#114 (Boston, 7–10 December 2026); SA#114 (Boston, 8–11 December 2026).
  • Next milestone: ITU-R WP 5D #54: submissions of IMT-2030 (6G) radio interface proposals begin, February 2027 (planned).