Windows Vista tcpip.sys Connection Limit Patch
Hi all: im new here and pretty noob with computers. As the title suggested, im trying to increase the connection limit for vista. THis is because whenever i use emule (or other p2p programs) and have large numbers of half open connections openmy network will shut down and i have to restart it. I have googled a bit and found there is a patch (Windows Vista Event ID 4226 Auto Patcher) but i dont know if this is safe to use as a lot of people have had problems after they installed the patch. Is there other ways to increase the limit manually? any suggestions? thanks!
August 28th, 2008 9:07am

If you mean your modem or router crashed then increasing the limit will not help. (The device probably crashed under load.) Try to limit the number of half-open connections in your P2P program instead, or get a better modem/router.
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
August 31st, 2008 3:14pm

Hi, I would like to share the following information with you. The limited TCP connections helps to limit the speed at which malicious programs, such as viruses and worms, spread to uninfected computers. Malicious programs often attempt to reach uninfected computers by opening simultaneous connections to random IP addresses. Most of these random addresses result in a failed connection, so a burst of such activity on a computer is a signal that it may have been infected by a malicious program. There is no workaround from Microsoft to override this limitation. It is hard coded into TCPIP.SYS. There are third party workarounds, but these are not support by Microsoft and these workarounds may break if a Windows Vista update or Service Pack replaces the TCP/IP drivers. Thank you for your understanding.
September 1st, 2008 9:06am

Robinson Zhang - MSFT wrote: Hi, I would like to share the following information with you. The limited TCP connections helps to limit the speed at which malicious programs, such as viruses and worms, spread to uninfected computers. Malicious programs often attempt to reach uninfected computers by opening simultaneous connections to random IP addresses. Most of these random addresses result in a failed connection, so a burst of such activity on a computer is a signal that it may have been infected by a malicious program. There is no workaround from Microsoft to override this limitation. It is hard coded into TCPIP.SYS. There are third party workarounds, but these are not support by Microsoft and these workarounds may break if a Windows Vista update or Service Pack replaces the TCP/IP drivers. Thank you for your understanding. IMO Microsoft should allow the user to tweak this, especially with the increasing popularity of P2P applications. This very low limit severely impacts the performance of such programs.Users should be allowed more control over their preference of "security" or performance. Otherwise Microsoft should attempt to find a value that better balances these two aspects (I believe 10 is too restrictive).
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
September 2nd, 2008 6:39am

Hi Teoh, Thank you for your feedback. It is due to customers like you who help Microsoft to provide the best possible customer service in the industry. In the meantime, you can send all your suggestions and feedback to mswish@microsoft.com Thanks!
September 3rd, 2008 10:39am

Ten half-open connections is not enough for me to run my normal programs, without any edge computing (e.g., p2p). Microsoft knew this would happen occasionally when they imposed the patch, but apparently did not realize that programs like Office 2007 would need a higher limit for smooth operation (when used in parallel with other programs). The smallest half-open limit that one could logically justify is 20 per process, similar to DOS programs.The "Worm" reasoning is easily proven false: Since Worms spread exponentially, even a limit of 2 would not slow their spread significantly. There is always a trade-off between security and user experience. However, the first rule of security is that it allow the work to proceed. Maybe the solution is to restrict processes without administrator rights.
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
September 10th, 2008 8:01am

I am having the same problem. My internet/network card bites the dust whenever I am playing an online game. There is a lot of information that is needing to get passed back and forth, apparently after an update to Vista 64bit, it started having problems. I can access the internet and chat online, but whenever I play any game that requires me to access the internet my connection drops due to this Connection Limit error. I have checked the Event Viewer after each attempt and I can safely say that this security limit is the reason why I cannot play my game. I have updated my drivers, I have no malware/viruses/spyware/etc and I don't use P2P downloading programs. Is anyone able to help me?
February 21st, 2009 1:20pm

I look at a lot of fansub videos and I have recently started having this problem with my Vista Ultimate 64. I use bittorrent to download these videos and now Vista loses the connection not only when I am downloading, but also when I am transferring files between computers or if I am trying to watch videos and it is quite frustrating and I think it highly unreasonable that you would insert something into an OS that you cannot adjust to suit your needs and then tell us that you have have no workaround when this "feature" starts to get in the way. I have never had any problems with viruses since the first thing I do with any computer after installing the OS is to install an antivirus/firewall suite. I need to have this problem resolved and I need it resolved quickly!
Free Windows Admin Tool Kit Click here and download it now
March 3rd, 2009 8:48pm

Another problem that I have found as of today is that Vista x64 keeps disconnecting me if I try to play Unreal Tournament 3. This is turning into a real problem and I hope that someone at Microsoft is looking at eliminating this situation, it is turning into a real bother and I think that with the amount of money that I spent on this OS I should NOT be having this problem that was intentionally put there by its manufacturer!
March 16th, 2009 8:24am

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other recent topics Other recent topics