I believe that generally, users understand versions and speeds but not the
implications of certain frequencies.  So, rather than focusing on the
frequency I would throw these out there as suggestions: (even though the
nit-picker in me is cringing a bit)

For the 2.4GHz SSID:
- CEROwrt-old
- CEROwrt-slow

and just CEROwrt for the 5GHz SSID, with the intent that the the choice
offered to the users nudges them towards the better choice.

Cheers,
  Kelvin



On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 2:46 PM, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have long used "5" as an indicator that the 5ghz channel was better.
> This goes back to a long thread on nanog, like 4? 5? years ago, where
> the hope was to train users that "5" was better.
>
> Well, it's turned out that 5 is frequently better, but not always, AND
> that clients tend to go for the shortest of the SSIDs available. So a
> thought would be to create another ad-hoc standard for deprecating 2.4
> ghz, and have the shorter SSID be the 5ghz one.
>
> Ideas for the 2ghz channel:
>
> CEROwrt-legacy
> CEROwrt2
>
> I'm not huge on "legacy" because it's rather long but am stuck for
> standards, I'd like a default 2.4 ghz SSID that clearly indicates the
> real use to which 2.4ghz is suitable, like:
> CEROwrt-GET-OFF-MY-BABY-MONITOR-YOU-FREAK
>
> ideas for another ssid naming standard slightly longer than a single
> digit that would make sense to mom?
>
> --
> Dave Täht
>
> Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt:
> http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html
> _______________________________________________
> Cerowrt-devel mailing list
> Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel
>