gadean Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 And BTW, running two firewalls is like wearing two condoms, its stupid and may hinder more than help you. Actually, wearing two condoms causes friction between the two layers of latex, greatly increasing the risk of tearing. It does more harm than good. Condoms are highly effective against disease/pregnancy when used properly. Oh yeah, back on topic.. I see no need to replace the SP2 TCP/IP stack as it should not hinder internet performance under normal circumstances. P2P apps and the like should not be affected by this additional layer of security. I believe it only affects those being flooded by requests in the case of a DOS attack. Additionally, aren't LowIDs caused by misconfigured ports? I don't think they are caused by the amount of data being sent to and from the peer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkmark327 Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Yes, unless you're somehow under the impression that having the TCP/IP stack back the way it was in vanilla XP and SP1 made them the pinnacle of security... :rolleyes:And BTW, running two firewalls is like wearing two condoms, its stupid and may hinder more than help you. And is it just me, or have the mods deleted fully 2/3rds of your total posts? Alright so fine, if we have one firewall and know what we're doing to avoid being 0wned by a stupid worm, are we still idiots for removing the limit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drewb0y Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 I installed a modified tcpip.sys that was set for unlimited connections on two different machines. Worked fine for a while and then I would get BSOD, usually when trying to do network file transfers from one machine to the other. One thing that both machines share in common, is that they are using wireless networking. Both machines have had an excellent track record as far as bsod's go. And one is a fresh install. So it's back to the previous sp2 tcpip.sys for me. The error message was stop 0x0000008e, if anyone's curious. But since the only thing changed on either of those machines was tcpip.sys, I place the blame squarely on it's feet. There will be an upcoming version of Shareaza that will have some changes for xpsp2 in mind, but no idea what changes are to be made. Look around in the shareaza forum for that info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentKnight Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Sorry, I don't need a high post count to know an idiot when I see one, trust me. If you want to patch, go ahead. If not, don't. I just don't understand why you're bitching and moaning about something such as this. Chances are, if someone has the knowledge level required to even understand what this patch is for or fixes, they are probably "safe" enough to take care of themselves and aren't the ones Microsoft is probably worrying about. Actually the problem comes from people thinking they know what the purpose of this patch is thinking it is going to help something that it isn't and therefore making their system less secure helping the spread of viruses, worms, or whatever may exploit this on their system. Has nothing to do with your post count it has to do with knowledge of networking and the way this limitation affects your networking. No one is "bitching" about this we all want users to understand what this is and people are supplying alot of conflicting information. So it would be better if people that don't understand would just keep there mouths shut, but since that isn't going to happen we have a right and responsibility to inform users to the best we can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkmark327 Posted August 19, 2004 Share Posted August 19, 2004 Say what you want, but after I installed the patch I no longer have the massive delays in loading websites. And I can assure you that my system is no less secure because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teleguise Posted August 20, 2004 Share Posted August 20, 2004 Since this 'DEBATE' :unsure: seems to be taking place in two different locations on this forum, as opposed to just duplicating my words if at all interested click the link to 2 posts I think are beneficial to this whole discussion. My words in other thread with same discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooldude7273 Posted August 20, 2004 Share Posted August 20, 2004 I say put it in! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelTrepid Posted August 20, 2004 Share Posted August 20, 2004 Cool!!!! :woot: A fight and I'm not involved!!! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lightingfx Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 id just like to add that ive downloaded the patch and installed it. now how do i get the properties to show up like here: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/voodoo.mchale...pproperties.jpg btw: ive already right clicked on the file and checked its properties but the properties dont the look anything like the image link above, whys this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurora Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 mine patches fine but when i reboot and try to surf the internet or anything internet related i get speeds of 1KB a sec on 100Mbit line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xml Posted September 1, 2004 Share Posted September 1, 2004 my emule is running smooth as ever and i wont patch something that is meant to make xp more secure mine patches fine but when i reboot and try to surf the internet or anything internet related i get speeds of 1KB a sec on 100Mbit line :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livesoca Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 Hey All, I came across this app on a German site. I know it's very similer to AutoStreamer and NLite. It's also able to include the IP connection patch, Uxtheme.dll and the last one (( sfs_os.dll ) which I know nothing about) Does anyone know if there's a English version to it? Link Here: http://www.winfuture.de/news,16597.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samoa Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 I know this is late in the game. But I haven't seen any limiting from SP2, rather it seems to adapt quite well to the number of connections I have runnning. It seems to do better with more connections to a point.... :D Which makes me quite happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dessimat0r Posted September 20, 2004 Share Posted September 20, 2004 I know this is late in the game. But I haven't seen any limiting from SP2, rather it seems to adapt quite well to the number of connections I have runnning. It seems to do better with more connections to a point.... :D Which makes me quite happy. As many people have said, it only limits incomplete connections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rokdevil Posted October 31, 2004 Share Posted October 31, 2004 Well, for all of you who don't believe that the restriction affects p2p apps, I'm here to tell you differently. I have an app which hosts a gnuc com object. Prior to SP2 everything ran beautifullly. Now, not so much. So far (in five days of testing) we've managed to get 1 connection sustained before the "queueing" process seems to bog down. We've got a browser hosted in the same app and you can't even surf because the damn web request is queued behind all the requests by gnucDNA trying to connect to hosts.<br> Thanks M$ for the clusterf#ck.<br> And remember, our application is for CONSUMERS. What are we going to tel them? "Oh, to make this work on SP2 you need to install a HACKED version of tcpip.sys" ? ! ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted November 1, 2004 Share Posted November 1, 2004 And remember, our application is for CONSUMERS. What are we going to tel them? "Oh, to make this work on SP2 you need to install a HACKED version of tcpip.sys" ? ! ? 584836741[/snapback] No, you should work with Microsoft to get aq patch for your program or for them to release a patch for their software to fix this issue. Just curious, did you have this problem with any of the other SP2 betas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slimy Posted November 11, 2004 Share Posted November 11, 2004 gonna try this, emule and bittorent are much slower Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthCat Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 Yup, this is post number 1 - NUMERO UNO - for me. I installed the patch because I'm an "awww what the hell" kinda guy. Figured if it could help it couldn't hurt. I havent really noticed that much of a difference, but my BitTorrent speeds have increased. It wasnt a huge jump, but it did change. Again, I have to comment on the 2 firewalls -> 2 condoms line. Complete genius :yes: . I dont think I could have said it better myself, and when I read that, it made my day. Thank you. You all take care now, I'm going to bed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qinwarrior Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 Looking good to me. People are fighting over TCP limited. :blink: Why don't you all post something useful? Like, a link that explain about TCP connection or something that would educated people who does not know. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Posted December 9, 2004 Share Posted December 9, 2004 (edited) Why don't you all post something useful? Like, a link that explain about TCP connection or something that would educated people who does not know.?:DD 585069703[/snapback] Budman explains it all .... Unless you are seeing the 4226 errors in your event log, this change in functionality has no effect on your connection at ALL.? Have you seen 4226 events in your event log?? SP2 did NOT change the number of connections you can have open, etc.. only the number of INCOMPLETE connections that can be attempted per second, etc.. See below - and the link to MSAnd even if you are seeing them - I would suggest you track down WHAT exactly is causing your machine to create connection attempts that do not get answered at a rate of more than 10 per second, since why would you want to try and make connections to things that do not respond, etc...? I would look to what would be doing this, before looking to some hack to try and correct something you may or may not even have an issue with. http://www.microsoft.com/technet/prodtechn...n/sp2netwk.mspx[/uLimited number of simultaneous incomplete outbound TCP connection attempts The TCP/IP stack now limits the number of simultaneincomplete outbound TCP connection attempts. After the limit has been reached, subsequent connection attempts are put in a queue and will be resolved at a fixed rate. Under normal operation, when applications are connecting to available hosts at valid IP addresses, no connection rate-limiting will occur.? When it does occur, a new event, with ID 4226, appears in the system?s event log. 585033944[/snapback] Useful enough for ya? Edited December 9, 2004 by Frank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qinwarrior Posted December 10, 2004 Share Posted December 10, 2004 Budman explains it all ....Useful enough for ya? 585072107[/snapback] yeah man! :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigohhhh1 Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 I installedit and everything runs superfast HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xenomorph Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 I installedit and everything runs superfast HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :devil: 586048244[/snapback] THREAD NECROMANCY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milan - Posted June 11, 2005 Share Posted June 11, 2005 I installedit and everything runs superfast HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHhAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA :devil: 586048244[/snapback] your a bad first poster 1. you resurected a very old thread 2. cut the captials Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts