Device Interconnectivity, Multiple commlinks? Options

[BlackHat]

So, if I have one commlink, and have two devices subscribed to it... say... my image-linked cybereyes and my skinlinked smart-gun... they can communicate with one antoher, and share information (ballistic data, trajectories, etc).

If two commlinks are connected, they can share data files and whatnot - but can they also share linked devices?

Like, could this second commlink access my eye-recording data as if it was connected to my eyes - but all traffic would have to go through the intermediate commlink?

They give examples in the book where a team has their commlinks connected, and can share data (biometrics, enemy locations, etc). So how exactly is this handeled? They're not using "Transfer data" actions every round to send the crap back and fourth are they? But if not, it seems like you get around the device-limit for commlinks just by having a ton of them.

And if two commlinks can share attached devices, could once commlink use the other as a router. Like, if you turned the second commlink's wireless capability off, but then physically linked it to the first... could you then use it to access a wireless node (by having the first commlink access it for you)... allowing you to load up one commlink with a buff firewall, stealth, eccm, scan and IC programs for network security, and having all your hack-y stuff on the second commlink. This way, your network is secure, but your commlink isn't bogged down by the security.

That seems to defeat the point of having a program limit on commlinks... but since, you know, that's how they do things in real life... it seems like maybe a legitimate tactic - you just couldn't access those other programs yourself... they'd just be passivly protecting your network.


I'm sure this has been brought up several times before.. .but does anyone have a good grasp on the rules to explain how it really works in game mechanics?

[Xeros]

I don't think they would have your eyes as a subscriber but you could transmit your eye data streaming to their commlink...I think.

[RunnerPaul]

Multiple Commlinks is an idea I've been toying with myself. As for how it'd be handled, say for your example of sending a feed from your cybereyes through one commlink on its way to another, as best I understand it, it just takes one simple action to start feeding the datastream, and after that, the connection takes care of itself (But may be terminated at any time with a free action). In fact, frequently used transfers, such as from your skinlinked subvocal microphone to all your teammate's earbud headphones, could probably initially be setup with the simple action and quickly toggled on/off with the Change Linked Device Mode Free Action.

The question is, how complex does your PAN have to get before you start having to use the Browse utility on it just to find your own stuff?

[BlackHat]

Or have agents running to monitor things. :sleepy:

Anyways. So, if you could set up a connection as a simple action and leave it running... what does that mean in terms of one commlink using he other comlink as a router/firewall? Could you use a simple action to set up a connection where all network traffic is passed through commlink1 to commlink2 (and another simple action for the reverse)? If so, wouldn't commlink1's improved system/firewall/stealth make the whole network harder to locate - despite the fact that your "main" commlink isn't running stealth, and may have lower system ratings. Wouldn't the IC running on commlink1 be able to interact with intruders just as easily - but without slowing down commlink2?

I guess I see it as offloading all the processing about the various programs to multiple processors/computers - and only the network traffic (simsense data) is being passed around.

[Eyeless Blond]

Most of what you guys are talking about is basically Cluster Computing, which has been around for ages already.

[BlackHat]

Right. But, I guess my question is - although it makes sense in real life, how does it work in the game?

It seems like if you allowed this, there is no limit to the number of devices/programs a Hacker could have running - and everyone might as well have a "firewall" commlink protecting their PAN (that does nothing except protect the network). It'd cost like 100 nuyen to set up, and every time you kill someone you're going to find some cheap-o commlink you can use to expand your PAN's capabilities.

[Eyeless Blond]

I don't see a problem with the Firewall commlink at all. In fact you might even be paranoid enough to have three or four cheapo Firewalls installed in series, as there appears to be no Response penalty to bouncing your connection around through a bunch of nodes like that. The problem there of course is cheapo Firewall commlinks are going to have low System, so you'll be throwing a max of 7 dice back at each successive hacking attempt. And of course you've got to carry all that junk around somehow, though I imagine a metalink is probably about the size of a car alarm clicker so that's not so big of a deal.

Having secondary commlink(s) behind the firewall to run your agents also doesn't seem prohibited, and would be a good idea.

The third idea--the creation of an actual server farm of commlinks behind your firewall so you can break the System limit without losing Response--unfortunately isn't supported by the rules. If you were to house-rule an implementation it would at the least require a custom OS, which considering the rules for programming puts it out of the reach of actual play.

This last point annoys me slightly, as the rules state how all hackers write their own programs, but if, for instance the Hacker aerchtype tried to program even half the stuff on his starting commlink it would take him over a decade.

[PlatonicPimp]

I've house ruled that anytime you route your signal through another node like beigng described, before hitting the matirx at large, your response is limited to the lesser of the two devices. A chain is only as good as it's weakest link.

Having multiple commlinks with multtiple subscription lists is going to require either switching which commlink you are jacked into, using command to order around your other commlinks, or having an agent on the commlink manage your stuff. That last option is the most popular.

[bahwi]

I'd say a firewall commlink works when people are trying to hack you specifically, but stealth on the firewall commlink(and any other programs) won't help because you're directly connected to whatever you're hacking. Someone trying to trace you will run into your firewall commlink, but may be able to tack onto your signal and bypass it altogether(data has to come out, you have to have permission with the firewall, and data has to come in, back to you, and has to have permission with the firewall). However, it would help from walk by hackings, and that's a good thing.

I'd also say you only have access to the programs running on your commlink, not the ones your connected to(routers, agents, firewalls). As said earlier, you use the Command program to order them to do things, but you can't pull an attack program off of another commlink and use it. (Unless you copy it over and run it)

[Eyeless Blond]

[Vaevictis]

[PlatonicPimp]

I always figured that the response rating not only represented processing power, but bandwidth as well, being a general "how good is my computer" stat.

[RunnerPaul]

[Vaevictis]

[Eyeless Blond]

I think he was talking about if you were tryiing to connect to some remote node, at which point you'd be limited by the density of the mesh network you're surrounded in. Think of it as how many bars your cell phone has: with one bar you've only got one cell tower in the area, and your connection will be a bit sporadic. With several bars your connection will be much better.

This has nothing to do with the daisy-chain of metalink firewalls though, as those are (likely) hardwired together, so there are no problems with intermittent signals and connections.