Jump to content

Event id 4226


Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

PS: I know I should buy a router, but I need to access my PC Remotely (ftp, remote desktop, other ports that need accessing, etc), and a router would mess that up (since I would get a 192.168.0.x IP)

Nonsense... You can set up most routers to use a Dynamic IP and register with the host. You can then inside the router (which you can set to any IP range you so choose) to forward all the ports required for your remote access to your PC directly.

For example, say you have a router that registers a mydomain.net at DynDns.com. And your PC is on your network. You have an FTP Server running on port 2000 on

You set up the router to forward any traffic coming in on port 2000 to

You can connect to your ftpserver anywhere in the world by using an FTP program and using:


You can set up any services to run that way on the router. the router would not screw anything up, it just means you'd have to spend time setting up the router and re-doing your internal network. Plus you could use the firewall on said router and disable the Windows one as well. So you'd be protected by SPI Router firewall AND nat.

Not to mention that if you PC goes down for anytime, (or you do a software/OS upgrade downgrade whatever) none of the other PC's are going to see any connectivity issues as the router is doing it and not your PC.

The amount of time you have spent getting this to work, you could have got a router and got it working (everything working) within a a few days.

I would reccomend getting this router: http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList....ription=WRT54GL

and then either getting the Tomato firmware from http://www.polarcloud.com/firmware <<Awesome

or for a more advanced firmware go to http://www.dd-wrt.com/dd-wrtv2/index.php

Really just a little bit of work (and searching the internet/forum for the ports you need to forward) and you'll be all set. No more crappy ICS... total access to your PC from anywhere and access to your router too so you can check logs etc...

I did this two years ago and I never ever looked back. I dont miss ICS and I never will.

Just my 2 cents.

Edited by Cythrawl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 5 months later...

I know this is an old thread, but it's a problem with Vista that many users will encounter if they have certain needs for their PC.

Also, Spooky- you're absolutely incorrect in your assessment with the status of Windows TCPIP stacks as this is absolutely a flaw and problem with TCPIP on the Windows platform. This breaks compatibility as there is no such "limit" imposed on how many half-open connections a platform may have, and the behavior in this condition (and it's assumptions) is also highly flawed (i.e. denial of service imposed on the user).

Windows XP (like all other operating systems) had no limits. This is normal behavior. It was decided by Microsoft that to protect the less than technically savvy PC users that a limit should be imposed to try and reduce the spread of malware/trojans and viruses. Unfortunately Malware, Trojans and Viruses are only one type of network application that encounters this scenario. There are a multitude of client->server or peer to peer uses that can trigger this artificially imposed limit. In effect, they have thrown the baby out with the bath water. This was performed on Windows XP (around SP2 whereabouts) and now carries over to Vista. At least in XP, several patches and changes can be applied to help work-around this inflicted issue.

P2P and other more complex applications that require fast access to a number of remote hosts will hit this limit. When this limit is reached, NO new connections can be established. This is a denial of service imposed and assumes a particular situation is occurring. When using P2P or connecting to multiple remote sites, this limit can easily be reached and thus locks the PC from further network usage.

It's debatable whether or not, in the context of "average" users and Windows world, how effective or overall good such a measure may be. It's absolutely NOT debatable if this is an issue or non-standard behavior for networking performance/implementation. Hands-down, this breaks and limits the capabilities of Windows PC's and imposes severe limits that should be user-configurable.

There are some patches available, such as this document with links: (from previous poster)


and a more in-depth article + instructions:


Microsoft should most definitely address this problem as 2-25 half-open connection limit and it's imposed behavior when this limit is reached is highly flawed.

Edited by Sharkfood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...