IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Converting SR1/SR2/SR3 Matrix hosts, into SR4 nodes
Omer Joel
post Oct 21 2005, 12:07 PM
Post #1


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Rehovot, Israel
Member No.: 265



The many old Shadowrun adventures and sourcebooks include, among other thing, outdated (both in terms of in-game history and in terms of game rules) Matrix hosts and systems. So, how do we "Reload" the Matrix? :D

RTGs should be considered as the routers and mainframes of very large, regional WANs. LTGs could be treated as LANs and/or WANs but are far less relevant than in SR1/SR2/SR3 unless extreme layring is applied for security reasons. The same goes with PLTGs, though these are far more likely to be layered than RTGs and LTGs.

In SR1/SR2, Each Host consisted of a map of Nodes, which had to be accessed in a linear fashion. They should be converted to SR4 networks of wireless nodes as following:
- SANs should be ignored unless the system is mostly isolated and wired (which is rare)
- SPUs should be ignored unless they are specifically labeled as "chokepoints" or similarly, and then the nodes connected to them (I/OPs and SMs) can only be accessed through them; you'd have to establish a wireless link with the chokepoint ("SPU") before connecting to the layered nodes.
- CPUs should remain "CPUs", that is the facility's/building's mainframe/miniframe/server/security hub/data security hub, but usually one cannot shut down the entire network from them. You could also use them as the local LAN.
- I/OP's and SMs are the devices controlled through them i.e. cameras, doors, etc.
- Datastores are file servers and/or personal terminals (terms).

Unless extreme security layring is in place, assume all or most of the nodes to be accessible via wireless link.

Now, on to Ratings:
Response: 75% of the SR1/SR2 node's Security Rating number, rounded up.
Signal: Assign as you see fit, but typically 3 to 6.
Firewall: If an Access or Barrier ICE is present, the base Firewall rating would be 75% of it's rating, rounded up, plus +1 if the ICE is a Barrier if no such ICE is present, use 75% of the Security Rating number, rounded up; add to that a Security Color Modifier:
CODE

Color Modifier
Blue     -1
Green     0
Orang    +1
Red      +2

System: 75% of the SR1/SR2 node's Security Rating number, rounded up.
Matrix Condition Monitir: As usual (8+[System/2]).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omer Joel
post Oct 21 2005, 12:46 PM
Post #2


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Rehovot, Israel
Member No.: 265



Now on to SR1/SR2-style ICs (or maybe SR3 too?). First and foremost, their Pilot rating equals 75% of their old "Rating", rounded up; for simplicity sake, assume that their programs are of that rating too, as is their Firewall (as usual).

Access and Barier are discussed in my previous post.

Scrambler: Simply assume that all the files and/or devices in the node are encrypted with a Rating equal to 75% of that of the old IC, rounded up, and add a data bomb of the same rating to each.

Trace and Report: Has the Analyze and Track programs.
Trace and Dump: Has the Analyze, Track, Exploit and Stealth programs, and tries to crash the Hackers system.
Trace and Burn: Has the Analyse, Track, Attack and Armor programs.
Tar Baby: Has the Analyze and Exploit programs, and tries to force the Hacker's system to unload programs.
Tar Pit: Has the Analyze and Exploit programs, and tries to force the Hacker's system to delete programs.
Killer: Has the Analyze and Attack programs.
Blaster: Has the Analyze, Attack and Exploit programs.
Non-Lethal Black ICE: Has the Analyze and Blackout programs.
Lethal Black ICE: Has the Analyze and Black Hammer programs.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rifleman
post Oct 21 2005, 01:35 PM
Post #3


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 123
Joined: 7-October 05
From: Glow City Safehouse
Member No.: 7,821



:love:

An actual SIMPLE conversion scheme that works effectively 99% effectively for past products all the way to first edition. Danke! :D

[Edit: I can't spell.]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NightmareX
post Oct 21 2005, 02:12 PM
Post #4


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 831
Joined: 5-September 05
From: LAX, UCAS
Member No.: 7,687



Only one point I disagree with - there would still be RTGs. They'd be somewhat reduced in importance, but they'd still be there.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
PlatonicPimp
post Oct 21 2005, 03:10 PM
Post #5


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,219
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Lofwyr's stomach.
Member No.: 1,320



I agree. I think that there are still regional grids. They are what bounce your signal from point A to point B when you make a call outside your personal signal range. (i.e. the cellular network.)

That's important to remeber because it means that anytime you go to a node outside your personal signal range, the traffic is travelling through the RTG, and therefore anyone on the RTG can try to intercept the signal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omer Joel
post Oct 21 2005, 07:37 PM
Post #6


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Rehovot, Israel
Member No.: 265



Corrected.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Omer Joel
post Oct 21 2005, 07:41 PM
Post #7


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 278
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Rehovot, Israel
Member No.: 265



QUOTE (Rifleman)
:love:

An actual SIMPLE conversion scheme that works effectively 99% effectively for past products all the way to first edition. Danke! :D

[Edit: I can't spell.]

Actually, it works for SR1/SR2 only for now; SR3 is a bit more different in concept, and far more abstract, so I'll probably treat the SR3 "Host" as a Network (LAN); there WILL be more calculations to be done in the SR3 version. Ironically, there much more in common between the SR1/SR2 Matrix system and the SR4 one than between the SR3 and the SR4 Matrix systems. SR4 is somewhat like the SR1/SR2 system with linearity thrown out of the window, so that you can (in most cases) access whatever node you want rather than "dungeon-crawl" your way to it from the SAN.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Rifleman
post Oct 21 2005, 10:49 PM
Post #8


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 123
Joined: 7-October 05
From: Glow City Safehouse
Member No.: 7,821



QUOTE (Omer Joel)
Actually, it works for SR1/SR2 only for now;

I'm sorry, but why would I want to translate anything else? :D

(Okay, Okay, I am kidding, that was a bad joke. But I am a first gen SR man myself, so SR3 is of secondary concern.)

Still, from your work so far, I consider it only a matter of time before you crack that particular egg.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ashenwo1f
post Jan 23 2006, 03:35 AM
Post #9


Target
*

Group: Members
Posts: 5
Joined: 23-January 06
Member No.: 8,191



this is AWESOME thanks, always good to be able to play a generational campaign if desired this helps allot.
Shadowrun has a neat story arc going on with what, like 20 years game time Being able to play through "historical" events is boss.
If i'm not ready for matrix 2.0 and don't want to ditch my old characters i don't have to. etc. etc.
If i want to play through maria mercurial or bug city i can. I think the new rules and setting are pretty great but they totaly didn't think about the entire setting.

Maybe in a source book.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
crash2029
post Apr 6 2007, 11:17 AM
Post #10


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 704
Joined: 20-November 06
From: The seemingly unknown area of land between Seattle and Idaho.
Member No.: 9,910



Thanks for the wiz conversions chummer. I'm prepping to run a few SR2 adventures for my group, the conversions are much apprieciated. So gracias, domo and thanx.

BTW the adventures are Eye Witness and Dark Angel. We don't really give a damn about universe continuity, mostly 'cause I'm the only one who knows it. :)

Anyhoo, thanks man.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
FriendoftheDork
post Apr 6 2007, 11:29 AM
Post #11


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,288
Joined: 4-September 06
From: The Scandinavian Federation
Member No.: 9,300



Thanks, this will make it so much easier to run 1st ed modules for my 4td ed group!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Apr 6 2007, 04:22 PM
Post #12


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (PlatonicPimp @ Oct 21 2005, 10:10 AM)
I agree. I think that there are still regional grids. They are what bounce your signal from point A to point B when you make a call outside your personal signal range. (i.e. the cellular network.)

Er ... no, I don't think so. Well, not as such, anyway. When every device is wireless, and every wireless device is also a router, you don't need an infrastructure. Once you have a certain density of devices, you have a mesh network. There might be devices installed to help facilitate long-distance communication (for example, a device on a tower with a Signal Rating of 9 or a Satellite Link or some such), but these are just devices, not networks.

Any discussion of an RTG or WAN or MAN would be analogous at best, and refer to "the devices in this area," rather than any sort of specific infrastructure.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nim
post Apr 6 2007, 05:11 PM
Post #13


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 244
Joined: 8-June 06
Member No.: 8,681



I disagree, Aaron. That approach essentially amounts to relying on the generousity of strangers. From a technical perspective, yes, every device could act as a router for every other device. And if this were a designed network - a bunch of devices in a corporate office, say - that's probably what they'd do. There, you're dealing with a collection of known, friendly devices.

Outside of a controlled environment, though, you can't ASSUME there will be 3rd-party devices in range that are willing to forward your signal. After all, why should they? They don't care whether your call goes through. And of course, if you want a reliable connection, you want to know and trust the node that's forwarding on your data. A pure mesh of peer nodes will be vulnerable to vandalism - all it takes is for someone to claim to be the least-cost route to some distant spot and then throw the data on the floor.

You might end up with some sort of managed peer network, though. Something like current-day celphone service, where part of the deal was that everyone on the service agreed to pass traffic for anyone ELSE on the service. There could be a sort of settlement process, where you get credits for routing other peoples' traffic, with the credits reducing your fee for the month.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Apr 6 2007, 06:46 PM
Post #14


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Nim)
I disagree, Aaron. That approach essentially amounts to relying on the generousity of strangers.

Don't think of it as "the generosity of strangers" so much as "conformity to standards." Modern routers on the Internet do this all the time. Got a Windows machine? Type in tracert bbc.co.uk and see whether all of the routers in the path belong to the same network, or whether some are "strangers" who are being "generous."

QUOTE (Nim)
Outside of a controlled environment, though, you can't ASSUME there will be 3rd-party devices in range that are willing to forward your signal.

Again, there's a matter of standards. When all wireless devices are set up to act as routers, and almost all electronic devices are wireless, it works fine. That's what the WMI was all about (page 34 in your hymnal). It's not about wireless networking, it's about ubiquitous wireless networking.

QUOTE (Nim)
And of course, if you want a reliable connection, you want to know and trust the node that's forwarding on your data.  A pure mesh of peer nodes will be vulnerable to vandalism - all it takes is for someone to claim to be the least-cost route to some distant spot and then throw the data on the floor.

This is actually less of a problem than you may think. Properly done, the sender would recognize the least-cost route and send a portion of a datagram via that route, and then find the next least-cost. Even better, shuffle your metrics each time you send a portion of a datagram. Even betterer, don't send consecutive chunks, and send (say) every twelfth bit along twelve different routes. I suspect the original designers had this in mind when they wrote the rule that you can only "eavesdrop on the wireless connections of anyone whose Signal range reaches you." (Boyle et al. 225)

QUOTE (Nim)
You might end up with some sort of managed peer network, though. Something like current-day celphone service, where part of the deal was that everyone on the service agreed to pass traffic for anyone ELSE on the service. There could be a sort of settlement process, where you get credits for routing other peoples' traffic, with the credits reducing your fee for the month.

There's another option, one that is less complicated in implementation and makes more sense from a nuyen standpoint. NeoNET says "make your wireless devices like this" and everyone complies or doesn't get to use the Matrix. No traffic tracking, no account balance changes, NeoNET gets all the cash and all the control.

Note that I'm talking about the Matrix in general, not private networks or the sort of internal infrastructure one would see in a government facility or on corporate campus. Those networks are most likely private, and even more likely wired (well, more accurately "cabled," since fiber optics don't really use wires, but you know what I mean).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nim
post Apr 6 2007, 07:34 PM
Post #15


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 244
Joined: 8-June 06
Member No.: 8,681



QUOTE (Aaron @ Apr 6 2007, 01:46 PM)
QUOTE (Nim)
I disagree, Aaron. That approach essentially amounts to relying on the generousity of strangers.

Don't think of it as "the generosity of strangers" so much as "conformity to standards." Modern routers on the Internet do this all the time. Got a Windows machine? Type in tracert bbc.co.uk and see whether all of the routers in the path belong to the same network, or whether some are "strangers" who are being "generous."

I'll reply to the rest when I get a chance to actually give full attention to the technical details, but I can reply to this one now. Oh - and the really general examples and such are just to keep this all readable, not to insult your intelligence, Aaron. You clearly know your stuff; we're disagreeing more about how the tech will be used than how it works :)

The routers in your traceroute are owned by people who are being PAID to route that traffic. There's a commercial agreement between me and my ISP. My ISP has service-and-reciprocity agreements with a bunch of peer providers, and (if it's a smallish ISP) with one or more big backbone providers. Everybody involved is getting their nickel, or being compensated via barter by having their own traffic carried in turn. It's cooperative, but it's a formalized cooperation with contracts and money changing hands.

Phone companies route calls between each other all the time, or you wouldn't be able to call a friend with a different cellular service. But they also compare who sent how much, and bill each other for the difference.

I /do/ think that cooperative, no-cost networks would exist, at least locally. But I think they'd be perceived as less reliable, so I don't think they'd displace paid services from most of the market.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Apr 6 2007, 08:10 PM
Post #16


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Nim @ Apr 6 2007, 02:34 PM)
The routers in your traceroute are owned by people who are being PAID to route that traffic.

[...]

Phone companies route calls between each other all the time, or you wouldn't be able to call a friend with a different cellular service. But they also compare who sent how much, and bill each other for the difference.

All well and good, and very true for the network as it exists today. But we're talking about a ubiquitous ad hoc network of The Future, with no formal infrastructure. I don't think the modern model applies.

EDIT: I should also point out that the medium in the modern model is a series of cables, wires, and other infrastructure that is actually owned and maintained by some entity. The medium for the wireless Matrix of 2070 is a chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is owned by no one and maintained by fundamental laws of the universe.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Nim
post Apr 6 2007, 08:53 PM
Post #17


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 244
Joined: 8-June 06
Member No.: 8,681



QUOTE (Aaron)
All well and good, and very true for the network as it exists today. But we're talking about a ubiquitous ad hoc network of The Future, with no formal infrastructure. I don't think the modern model applies.

EDIT: I should also point out that the medium in the modern model is a series of cables, wires, and other infrastructure that is actually owned and maintained by some entity. The medium for the wireless Matrix of 2070 is a chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is owned by no one and maintained by fundamental laws of the universe.

After giving it some thought, I /do/ think I was a bit too locked into The Way Things Are Now. But when my real issue is not being convinced that a purely ad-hoc network with NO other backbone makes sense / is plausible, you can see why 'it would work fine in a purely ad-hoc network' doesn't really help me come to terms with it :)

I (believe I) understand how the SR4 wireless world is meant to work; I think I'm just still convincing myself that it's believable.

You're not going to be able to route long-distance traffic by hopping from commlink to commlink; they don't have the range to cross, say, an ocean or large wilderness. For that, you need some sort of backbone - high-Signal transmitters, sattelite uplinks, whathaveyou. Those things ARE 'infrastructure', and they're not free. Someone built them, and someone's maintaining them, and they're getting paid for it. Even if ad hoc suffices for all the traffic within a metro area (which I wasn't convinced of before, but which I'm willing to grant on the basis of reasonable SOTA advances over the course of 60 years), I think you're still going to be looking at some sort of subscription service for long-haul links.

Or am I missing something?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Apr 6 2007, 09:25 PM
Post #18


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Nim)
You're not going to be able to route long-distance traffic by hopping from commlink to commlink; they don't have the range to cross, say, an ocean or large wilderness.

Yes and no. There's long range and there's long range. I imagine I could get a signal from Chicago to New York fairly reliably with all of the traffic and highways that are going between. But in Really The Middle Of Nowhere, you're kinda screwed without a Satellite Link (which has a Signal of 8, even though one would need a Signal of 9 to get to LEO, and 13 to get to geosynchronous orbit, but maybe the Signal is just for ground-based devices and the uplink is directional and separate).

As far as providing an uplink or similar facilities is concerned, I reckon that such a thing could easily be paid for with good old-fashioned marketing revenues. Let's say we put an uplink station or some other long-distance relay in the middle of Champaign, Illinois, and let's say the population there is still around 150,000. Let's also say that one Matrix ID and a month of contact information (what IDs that ID connected to) is worth 0.2 to marketing researchers and targeted advertisers and the like. That tower/uplink/whatever is going to produce 30,000 a month. No subscription fees, nothing up-front, just "here, use this," and away we go.

Is that plausible?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ravor
post Apr 6 2007, 10:37 PM
Post #19


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



Well I guess my question would be why would the Megas set up a system that they basically couldn't even pretend to control? Although I won't pretend to be a network wiz or anything and may just be showing off my ingonace in this matter, but if I'm understanding the way you're setting up the system then Commlink A is bouncing off clothes, RFID Tags, other commlinks, ect in order to access the 'Trix, and all you need to play is a commlink with enough power to reach out and touch someone...

In a world where big brother is watching and all powerful corperations seek to rule the virtual landscape it doesn't really make sense to me anyways to set things up that way. Well plus I don't agree that your shirt is going to have a signal greater then 1, or that people would allow their commlinks to be used as automatic routers without getting something in return. (Plus I don't buy the argument that you can always count on hitting ad-hoc routers in order to go where you want to go.)

Besides, the book itself mentions Public Access Wi-Fi Routers having a range of 10 km just like cell phone towers, with that short of range they can't have been meant for long distance traffic so given the fact that bandwidth is appearently not a huge concern I'd imagine that for cities and towns at least, you get access to the Matrix through your ISP which in turn 'buys' access to a city's Wi-Fi Routers. (After all given what we know about the Megas, why would they settle on a system where they only got to sell data, when they could charge an access fee and then sell the data as cream.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Apr 6 2007, 11:37 PM
Post #20


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Ravor)
Well I guess my question would be why would the Megas set up a system that they basically couldn't even pretend to control?

Easy. It's not about control. With control comes responsibility, and responsibility isn't profitable. Of course, you can't profit without some control, so you control the parts you have to, and with as little overhead as possible. For example, control the patents and the standards for the Wireless Matrix, and you get to collect from every manufacturer that wants to create a wireless device (with a discount to your own subsidiaries, of course).

QUOTE (Ravor)
Although I won't pretend to be a network wiz or anything and may just be showing off my ingonace in this matter, but if I'm understanding the way you're setting up the system then Commlink A is bouncing off clothes, RFID Tags, other commlinks, ect in order to access the 'Trix, and all you need to play is a commlink with enough power to reach out and touch someone...

I didn't set it up that way, Rob Boyle and company did. Go back and read the section entitled "Welcome to the Machine" on page 38 and 39 of your hymnal. Then look out the window and imagine you're in 2070. See that streetlight? Wireless. Those cars? Wireless. The traffic control box? Wireless. Those people walking across the street? Well, they're not wireless, but they've probably got PANs that are. The sewer drain? Probably wireless, if the city is tracking its infrastructure. The building across the street? Full of wirelessness. Heck, if you're in a large enough city, the street itself is wireless (GridGuide).

Of course, if you're in the country when you look out the window, the example is pretty screwy. But you know what? I live in a city that isn't exactly a metropolis, but my Palm Pilot just found eight wireless networks, and I'm on the edge of town, sixty-three years before the time we're discussing.

QUOTE (Ravor)
In a world where big brother is watching and all powerful corperations seek to rule the virtual landscape it doesn't really make sense to me anyways to set things up that way.

It does to me. If I wanted to go all Big Brother on a population, I'd want as few controls on the network as possible. Step 1 in the US administration's wiretapping program was to remove the oversight and controlling rules on the integrity and privacy of the communications infrastructure.

QUOTE (Ravor)
Well plus I don't agree that your shirt is going to have a signal greater then 1,

Yeah, that does sound silly. Of course, a Signal of 0 is three meters. I bet you're within three meters of a networked electronic device right now.

QUOTE (Ravor)
or that people would allow their commlinks to be used as automatic routers without getting something in return.

Erm ... what if the reward for routing traffic was the ability to use other people's commlinks as routers? This is really electronic communication as an extension of the social contract: you're not kicking people, and as such can expect not to be kicked in return.

QUOTE (Ravor)
(Plus I don't buy the argument that you can always count on hitting ad-hoc routers in order to go where you want to go.)

See the above, starting with "Then look out the window ..."

QUOTE (Ravor)
Besides, the book itself mentions Public Access Wi-Fi Routers having a range of 10 km just like cell phone towers, with that short of range they can't have been meant for long distance traffic

Ever played ultimate? I leave the relevance of the question as an exercise to the reader. =)

QUOTE (Ravor)
(After all given what we know about the Megas, why would they settle on a system where they only got to sell data, when they could charge an access fee and then sell the data as cream.)

I'd buy that if it was Megas (in the plural). But the WMI pretty much belonged to NeoNET, so the game theory works a little differently.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ravor
post Apr 7 2007, 03:29 AM
Post #21


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



Ok, I've reread the Welcome to the Machine and I've come away convinced that we must have two completely different books. About the closest I can find reguarding ad-hoc networks is the ability to link up with your friend's PAN in order to comunicate with them, in fact the way I read the bit about going to the mall you have to first subscribe to their network if you even want your commlink to even aknowledge the mall's existance.

When I move on to page 206 under the section entitled Matrix Topology it does talk about the wireless MESH network that is made up of PANs and other wireless devices, *BUT* it also explictaly talks about "hardwired base stations to the local Matrix infrastucture" which is in turn wired into local telecommunication grids. And it is the linking of those grids which forms the backbone of the Matrix.

And then the way that I read the PAN Modes section on page 211 Active Mode is the only one which other nodes can even access your PAN at all without your premission. In Passive Mode although your PAN does show up as an active network, only pre-authorized nodes can actually access you, and I for one have a very hard time believing that if the Matrix was supposed to be an ad-hoc network of various PANs that Hidden Mode would even be an option without somehow altering your commlink.

And in my opinion more evidence can be found on page 212 in the Linking and Subscribing section, where it talks about just because you have a wireless device(s), like the streetlamps, cars, and PANs you mentioned doesn't mean that they will actually talk to one another unless you tell them to. And given the fairly hard limit to the number of Nodes your commlink can even talk to at once, if my link were automaticaly using one or more as a wireless router then why isn't it mentioned? Because I'd bet that while on a Shadowrun and in Hidden Mode that extra subscribtion slot(s) might come in handy and I'd most definently wouldn't want corp security to use my commlink as an automatic router unless I was tapping into their conversations on purpose.

As for the rest of your post, well, given the way that I read your "hymnal" it's not relavent, there is still in use a hardwired Matrix infrastucture and wires are still the backbone of the 'Trix, not an ad-hoc network based off a "social contract" in a world that is supposed to be a dystopia.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Apr 7 2007, 04:19 AM
Post #22


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Ravor)
Ok, I've reread the Welcome to the Machine and I've come away convinced that we must have two completely different books. About the closest I can find reguarding ad-hoc networks is the ability to link up with your friend's PAN in order to comunicate with them, in fact the way I read the bit about going to the mall you have to first subscribe to their network if you even want your commlink to even aknowledge the mall's existance.

The disagreement does not arise from reading different books, but perhaps from different understandings about how routers work. A router can forward traffic without the source or destination accessing the router. Just because a device isn't acknowledging discovery signals doesn't mean that it can't forward traffic; in fact, I'd speculate that the reason a commlink in hidden mode can be discovered at all is the fact that it's still routing traffic (sure, this may mean that you can turn off the routing functions of your commlink, becoming much like a leech on a BitTorrent, but we'll have to wait for further information from FanPro to be certain).

Besides, when was the last time you connected directly with Level3.net? The only time a cabled backbone is going to be pertinent to the game is when a team specifically makes a run on a backbone facility, or possibly if the adventure is set in some place that has only one Matrix link to the rest of the world.

QUOTE (Ravor)
As for the rest of your post, well, given the way that I read your "hymnal" it's not relavent, there is still in use a hardwired Matrix infrastucture and wires are still the backbone of the 'Trix, not an ad-hoc network based off a "social contract" in a world that is supposed to be a dystopia.

With whom are you arguing? Go back and re-read my posts.

Sure, some of the Matrix is hard-wired. They wouldn't have rules for intercepting traffic if there wasn't. But a backbone isn't made of cables, it's made of routers. And the long-distance, intercontinental stuff is most likely satellite links, anyway; it's far easier and cheaper to use a satellite than to add and maintain physical infrastructure on the ground, especially in politically fractured areas, especially when there are already people living up there to do maintenance and repair.

While you're at it, perhaps you could explain how a social-contract-based network that is constantly exploited by hackers from the underworld, government, and megacorporations is not in keeping with a dystopian theme?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ravor
post Apr 7 2007, 05:17 AM
Post #23


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



QUOTE (Aaron)
Er ... no, I don't think so. Well, not as such, anyway. When every device is wireless, and every wireless device is also a router, you don't need an infrastructure. Once you have a certain density of devices, you have a mesh network. There might be devices installed to help facilitate long-distance communication (for example, a device on a tower with a Signal Rating of 9 or a Satellite Link or some such), but these are just devices, not networks.


QUOTE (Aaron)
Again, there's a matter of standards. When all wireless devices are set up to act as routers, and almost all electronic devices are wireless, it works fine. That's what the WMI was all about (page 34 in your hymnal). It's not about wireless networking, it's about ubiquitous wireless networking.


QUOTE (Aaron)
All well and good, and very true for the network as it exists today. But we're talking about a ubiquitous ad hoc network of The Future, with no formal infrastructure. I don't think the modern model applies.


QUOTE (Aaron)
EDIT: I should also point out that the medium in the modern model is a series of cables, wires, and other infrastructure that is actually owned and maintained by some entity. The medium for the wireless Matrix of 2070 is a chunk of the electromagnetic spectrum, which is owned by no one and maintained by fundamental laws of the universe.


QUOTE (Aaron)
Yes and no. There's long range and there's long range. I imagine I could get a signal from Chicago to New York fairly reliably with all of the traffic and highways that are going between.


Provided that the tags work out like I envision, the parts which I'm arguing with you on should be in bold face. As I understand your stance, you are arguing that infrastructure isn't needed because everyone acts as an ad-hoc router for everyone else. What I'm saying is that given that the Core Book mentions that wired local infrastructure is tied together to what I understand to be grids of city-wide infrastructure which are in turn connected together to from the gobal Matrix as we know it that the Matrix simply can't be comprised totally or even majority from a freely advalable ad-hoc MESH network because someone does have to pay for all the infrastructure that is explictly mentioned in the Core.

As for the idea that every wireless device is also a router, well it sure seems funny that they didn't mention how a device's true Subscription limit is System*2+2 because the way I read the rules (As I mentioned earlier, I'm not even close to a network expert in Real Life, and besides, since when has Shadowrun computers ever worked like they should in 'Real Life'?) any device acting as a Real Time Router needs to eat two subscription slots as the device has to connect to two different nodes to do its job. That means that according to RAW both the Meta Link and the CMT Clip simply can not act as Real Time Routers while connected to any other Node and if the Matrix was built on the idea that everyone would be part of the ad-hoc routing system its odd that there even are commlinks out there that violate that very premise in their design if you use RAW.

*Edit*

As for the bit about why the social-contract based network you've described not being dystopian in nature, well in my opinion the answer is the fact that for the most part it largely works where-as in my view of a dark and gritty dystopia the network as a whole would be overstrained to the point of falling apart as more and more people started leeching off the system. Of course, I've been told that I tend to run cyberpunk and dystopias at the extremes as well, so I'll conceed that point to a matter of personal taste.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Aaron
post Apr 7 2007, 06:02 AM
Post #24


Mr. Johnson
******

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 3,148
Joined: 27-February 06
From: UCAS
Member No.: 8,314



QUOTE (Ravor)
Provided that the tags work out like I envision, the parts which I'm arguing with you on should be in bold face. As I understand your stance, you are arguing that infrastructure isn't needed because everyone acts as an ad-hoc router for everyone else.

What you seem to be missing is the part where my whole argument is based on the discussions of WANs and MANs. The mention was pretty brief and was way back there, so I can see where it could be missed. Although, now that I look at it again, you actually quoted part of the message that mentioned that, but left that part out; why was that?

QUOTE (Ravor)
As for the idea that every wireless device is also a router [ ... ] any device acting as a Real Time Router needs to eat two subscription slots as the device has to connect to two different nodes to do its job.


The short answer is no. The long answer is encapsulated in a spoiler so as not to bore the uninterested.

[ Spoiler ]
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Ravor
post Apr 7 2007, 07:01 AM
Post #25


Cybernetic Blood Mage
******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,472
Joined: 11-March 06
From: Northeastern Wyoming
Member No.: 8,361



Well even based off the wiki links I still disagree albeit a little more informedly :facelick: , because the way I see things, the local Matrix infrastructure which we know does exist per RAW would basically equate a combination of dedicated wireless routers and the station(s) where they convert into wires and are connected to the regional/global infrastructure that we also know does exist per RAW.

So basically when Joe Street-Sam logs into the Matrix and browses a Hong-Kong node for a listing of local whorehouses, a simplifed version of his datatrail might look something like this...

(Joe's) Commlink ==> (Joe's) Apartment Terminal ==> (Joe's) District MAN ==> (ISP) District MAN ==> ISP Node ==> (ISP) District MAN ==> WAN ==> (Hong Kong) District MAN ==> (Hong Kong) Node

However, provided that the commcode Joe's buddy Frank Mage gave him for the Node in question is correct then Joe probably isn't even aware of the route his datatrail took as he enters the stylized palor and starts bringing up 3D pictures of the girls and notes their prices.

Whereas when Frank fires off a quick call advising which girls to pick up the trail might look like this.

(Frank's) Commlink ==> (Frank's) Apartment Terminal ==> (Frank's) District MAN ==> (Frank's ISP) District MAN ==> (Frank's) ISP Node ==> (Frank's ISP) District MAN ==> (Joe's ISP) District MAN ==> (Joe's) ISP Node ==> (Joe's ISP) District MAN ==> (Joe's) District MAN ==> (Joe's) Apartment Terminal ==> (Joe's) Commlink

However once again Frank isn't even aware of the datatrail as his Commlink/ISP handles it all for him.

Now under your stance of an ad-hoc network how would it work, and what exactly do you consider the Matrix infrastructure mentioned in RAW to be then?

*Edit*

QUOTE (Aaron)
What you seem to be missing is the part where my whole argument is based on the discussions of WANs and MANs. The mention was pretty brief and was way back there, so I can see where it could be missed. Although, now that I look at it again, you actually quoted part of the message that mentioned that, but left that part out; why was that?


In truth I missed grabbing that chuck in my cut/paste, but I think we still disagree on their status anyways so I'm not sure what including it would have changed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 24th October 2020 - 07:03 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.