How many simultaneous Taps are supported on IO Ninja?

I was unable to find if more than one tap can be used with IO Ninja simultaneously? I'd like to be able to record more than one two-way serial sessions without having to utilize multiple laptops to do it.

Is there at least a workaround using VMWare or Docker to have multiple sessions running at the same time - with each session connected to its own Tap?

Hello. I have the same question, regarding the "ioninja-hwc". I did not try it, but it seems that there is not option for "selecting" the serial tap, in the case that more than one is connected.
Regards!

@john-ruffing

Yes, that's totally possible -- you can start multiple Serial Tap sessions (or even multiple IO Ninja instances) and select which tap to use in each one using the drop-down list.

The magical numeric prefix (e.g., @001:002) is the bus number (libusb_get_bus_number) followed by the device address (libusb_get_device_address). Just something to identify and distinguish between multiple devices.

@jose-marro

As of now, that's not possible; ioninja-hwc picks the very first tap (i.e., the first on the list returned by libusb during enumeration).

What do you think would be a good way to select which tap to use via the command line? We can add a parameter like --index to pick the i-th device on the list.

@vladimir Hello!
In fact, for myself, any kind of index would be ok. Picking the i-th device of the device list would be perfect.
Perhaps could be a more expressive kind of index, eg use the usb bus:device number... but I just do not see any big advantage to use this more-complex-number, and perhaps could be worst because -I think- the number will change if we unplug/plug the device. On the order hand, a simple enumerate order index will not change in this case (as far as we do no disconnect more than one tap... and connect them in other order... in this case we deserve have to work a bit more checking that we are selecting the right tap). Anyway :-), I was thinking in a 2 o 3 taps case... so it is not a real problem to make sure to identify the device, whatever indexing we are using... so the simplest/safest implementation would be enough for my taste.
Regards!