On 31-07-20, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > As there has been no negative feedback about this, we will move to > > configure the same SSID for 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz in the quick setup. > > This will simplify the user experience. > > We have never tested it, but we did notice vendors nowadays, as well as the > *large* ISPs witht their own CPEs and firmware, append _2G and _5G (or do > something to that effect) to the default SSID.
I noticed that too. Do you know why they do this? If you want a device to be able to connect to both networks (e.g. your phone), you have to type the same password twice. It seems cumbersome. > > > As always, keep in mind that this should match the common needs of casual > > > users: advanced users can always go to the current Wireless menu. > > It can also be argued that casual users are better off with two networks > they can trivially use for separate things. Videogames and Smart TVs on 5G, > cellphones and tablets on 2G. Ok, this is a good use-case. In general, having more control from the device side is good, but it brings more complexity. > This is not a "special use case", you'll find lots of friends telling their > friends to do it that way, etc. So these "casual users" know about the two radios and their difference with respect to range and throughput? I'm a bit surprised. > IMHO, you could do it this way and still keep it very simple: > > > Network Name (also knonw as SSID): XXXX > [ ] assign different names for each radio > > Then you'd get all radios with SSID "XXXX" > > > Network Name (also knonw as SSID): XXXX > [X] assign different names for each radio > > Then you'd get XXXX_2G, XXXX_5G, and on APs with many radios, XXXX_5G2, etc. > > Nice and simple. No need for a [x] that triggers an UCI form change that > asks for separate SSIDs (although *that* would work as well). It's close to the current UI (see https://openwrt.org/docs/guide-user/luci/quick_setup ), although it doesn't offer a choice: it merely informs the user that the second radio will have a slightly difference SSID. Some users are lost when they are faced with a choice they don't understand. If we go this way, it would need some UX efforts to convey that "it's really optional, no worries if you don't understand". If I sum up, the three options so far are: [1] configure the same SSID on all radios [2] configure a different SSID on every radio [3] leave this choice to the user I would like to avoid option [3] for the reason above, but if half of the people need [1] and the other half need [2], then we need [3]. Thanks, Baptiste
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel