This isn't advanced, it's pretty common.
It would be great if it actually was common, and such features came pre-configured out of the box for users. Unfortunately, most of the routers I'm aware of that are given to users from ISPs don't even support guest modes.
I don't think there's an easy fix for this and I'm not criticizing WPA3 or anything. Ideally we could just update/throw out old, incompatible devices, but realistically I know that's not going to happen. I'm just pointing out that the suggestion to "keep WPA2 enabled for your old, WPA3-incompatible devices" kinda misses the point about WPA3 in the first place.
If you're vulnerable to compromised coffee shop or home networks already, you're likely to also be vulnerable tomorrow. The only change is a slight increment in the standard. And the worst companies are not going to be saved by any change in the standard.
I guess I don't really see the point of this entire subthread.
There's a false implication here that "keeping WPA2 enabled yesterday" isn't a problem. But it is. There are flaws in WPA2, and fixing those flaws is the entire point of developing WPA3. Security is supposed to get better as time goes on (hackers are certainly getting better whether your security is or not). But security isn't getting better if you just keep using the old standards.
Would you feel comfortable enabling WEP on all your company's routers with the justification "well we're not any more vulnerable today with WEP than we were in 1998 with WEP"?
>I guess I don't really see the point of this entire subthread.
I don't either.
For ordinary users, setting a strong passphrase is all they need to do to have network with improved security, even in the mixed mode.
In addition, you can isolate the WPA2 SSID away (for all those printers, Internet of Trash, some old smartphones that are never going to receive security updates, etc) from the rest of the network, and use strong, and independent passphrases for each network, the compromise of WPA2 would not affect WPA3 to a large extent.
Then what's the point of even developing WPA3? Why not revise WPA2 to just require really long passwords?