From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <david@lang.hm>
Received: from bifrost.lang.hm (mail.lang.hm [64.81.33.126])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC37B21F13F
	for <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>;
	Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:28:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asgard.lang.hm (asgard.lang.hm [10.0.0.100])
	by bifrost.lang.hm (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id
	rBGLSe3d022761; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:28:40 -0800
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 13:28:40 -0800 (PST)
From: David Lang <david@lang.hm>
X-X-Sender: dlang@asgard.lang.hm
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw7wRuadsrU0MXJt5FspyYTV1ZPuOv=7DMojTWssXG_Sog@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1312161327510.6430@nftneq.ynat.uz>
References: <CAA93jw7wRuadsrU0MXJt5FspyYTV1ZPuOv=7DMojTWssXG_Sog@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (DEB 1266 2009-07-14)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" <cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] treating 2.4ghz as -legacy?
X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13
Precedence: list
List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project
	<cerowrt-devel.lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/options/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/pipermail/cerowrt-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net>
List-Help: <mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel>,
	<mailto:cerowrt-devel-request@lists.bufferbloat.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 21:28:43 -0000

On Mon, 16 Dec 2013, Dave Taht 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?

for the Scale conference this year, we are going to use scale and scale-slow to 
try and discourage people from using 2.4

David Lang