Making technology work for you...

Get Your Free Subscription By Email:

Windows XP SP3 TCP/IP Patch To Increase Maximum Half Open Connection Limit

By default Windows XP allows a maximum of 10 half open connections at a time, this limit is implemented as a security feature to slow-down spreading of internet-worms in-case the user machine gets infected, if your network use is crossing this limit your computers event-log will show the following Event:

EventID 4226: TCP/IP has reached the security limit imposed on the number of concurrent TCP connect attempts.

This limit can slow down your internet access specially Peer-2-Peer applications like BitTorrent which require connecting to several peers for optimal performance, to increase this limit for speedy torrent downloading you need to patch the Windows TCP/IP system driver file, If your have already patched your TCPIP.sys file and updated your computer to Windows XP Service Pack 3, you should re-patch it using the free TCP/IP patcher for Windows XP.

TCP/IP Connection Limit Patch

Download Now [319 KB] >>
VirusTotal Scan Result - 0/36


so what does this do? boost my overall internet speed or just torrent downloads?

If you are making more then 10 connections at a time this should theortically increase the speed, I have personally seen good torrent speeds after applying the patch, there is no harm in trying.

I just tried it and I totally saw a huge change in my speed!

but where i patch???

Simply download the patch to Desktop and launch it, enter the new TCP/IP connection limit and click Apply to Patch.


tally 7.2 data migrate to tally 9. patch is not working.pls advice me what can i do ? its very urgent.

and it don know if im faster but sure

This is pc tcp ip limit extender.This has nothing to do with speed of your pc, speed depends on yor internet service provider.
TCP/IP patcher is useful who extract socks proxies and for testing for socks proxies via softwares.

My Nod32 says there is a virus in this file!

Maybe a false-positive check-it using VirusTotal, here is a report for earlier scan -

It doesn't seem to work with Windows Server 2003 Datacenter Edition.

This limitation is property of XP Workstation!

You dont need a patch for Windows Server OS's because if they are limited, not many people can connect to it.

we are using shared tally we r 12 user but some time when we connect it cant connect . how can we increase user limit in XPsp2

why is the recommend number of connections that high? (256 or higher?!)
i can't see why you would need more than 100 half open connections =o

personally i'd say go for something between 50 and 100...

suprised I am

This Does not seam to work. when i run the patch it says it was successful and when i try to connect more then 10 computers in the lap to the patched computer they error out saying that the connections are maxed. any ideas?

This is an advice to my dear friends; do not try everything you see in the internet. Most of these so called tricks won't help you at all. In fact if you try these things you're situation might turn a lot worse or maybe total disaster. The speed of your internet actually depends on your ISP and the bandwidth that they had allocated for you. So there’s no point in changing the settings of you computer. Just let the default settings as they are because they are set to those values for a fair reason. But if you really think tweaking settings could help you, get some advices from a professional.

You should not follow every trick on internet but this one DOES work particularly if you use torrents and other similar P2P applications, from common sense you can tell that Windows is blocking more then 10 connections and even reporting that in Eventlog so increasing more connections will make full use of bandwidth provided by your ISP.

ive used this patch in bunch of windows xp systems for 2 years have never had a problem , this is one thing that usually works it is for windows xp so keep that in mind

Your an idiot. Of course it works. Dont post if you have no idea what you are talking about...

I agree with fatboy 69, your tryin too hard to sound smart and you dont even know what your talking about. I bet you havent even tried the patch yet otherwise you would'nt have wrote what you just said.

From israel
I'm working for a software compagny and we are facing a big problem with XP2/XP3 10x connections.

By the way Thx for this patch we solved a lot of problems with it.

So is wrong to think that 1 computer = 1 connection
for ex: with our software when you start it you use 8 connections / sockets so very close to 10x !!!!!
in fact you can't do nothing with XP2/XP3 like this
each connection have life time when close it of 10 sec, so its the reason why you have this error message "You r... the limit of"
so we solve this problem to increase by 50 connections, tested and its working fine.

Just wanted to share some info

Why do you open 8 tcp connections with your software? It seems it's been heavily bad designed...

Don't use a "patch" for something like this, it's asking for trouble!
Go to, & open, your Networking screen, get to your Settings screen...
...and set your incoming & outgoing TCP/IP Max "allowed" connections from there...
(I'm on a 64-bit Vista machine, so I can't do it in front of me to tell you step-by-step, & my XP-SP3 box is sleeping right now);
That way, you're able to put back what you changed if need be, and you ONLY changed ONE thing at a time;
...(You DID only change that ONE thing at a time, RIGHT?!?)...
Using something to "patch" something that's a user-adjustable "setting" is just begging for all of the malware-writers out there to do a lot more than "open up your spigots settings" without you knowing about it, (and you wouldn't like some of the stuff I've seen them do "behind you back"!)...
There's also the "other" settings screen you can look at (and maybe change, but always make a backup or at least set a "Restore-point" first!), and that's using the "Control Panel-Devices-", (or whatever your machine calls it), and open your NIC (Network Interface Card) settings, found under "Networking" or "Adaptors-Networking" or whatever, then pick the one you are using to access the 'Net for your P2P connections;
Like for me, right now, I'm on my LAN's WiFi, so I'd open my "Device Manager-Connections-Wireless Adaptor", where the machine will tell me it's working OK & my WiFi unit is Enabled, then I'd open it further & look at the settings for the card or unit, and that's where I can set my max. Incoming & Outgoing Packet limit, and everything else;
(If your on your Ethernet adaptor, where this'll do you some GOOD, {or any other networking adaptor that has the following setting available), do NOT try to 'set' any 'Network Address' - This will really mess you up! leave that one alone, or you'll be glad you set that Restore Point!),
...and on my personal Ethernet Adaptor setting, since I like to know which machine's accessing the router and when, and since my DSL only goes to 7-Mbps, I set the card from "Speed Negotiation"-"Auto" to "10Mbps Full Duplex", which will cause the card to "talk" to the router at it's lowest apeed, and that makes my router light turn Amber instead of Green, so I can see it from across the room, and I know which machine's accessing the router at that moment...
...since the other machine that's connected is set for "Auto", which will run at 100-Mbps, and my router will give it a "Green" light instead of "Amber", even though my Internet connection can't go anywhere near that fast, the router will connect as fast as it can, just in case my LAN DOES run faster, (but I'm 'patient' enough for a 7-Mbps setting on my laptop)...
The idea I'm trying to pass along, is that anything a "patch" like this can do, it can do and a lot more, without you knowing what it DID, and that's "Bad Stuff",
...while if you "Set it yourself", you know what you did, AND you can try different settings until you find the one that's best for YOUR particular machine!
(I've never seen a "One setting works best" for ANY type of thing that's a varied as much as PCs can be!);
If you read the article that tells you what this "patch" is 'supposed' to be DOING, then you'll SEE, when you get to those "Settings" screens, exactly what it's supposed to change, and that you can change it yourself,
but letting a "patch" change something THAT simple makes ME personally suspicious as heck...
It's no wonder that there were so many diferent people yelling "Virus!" when they tried it, although I didn't try it myself, because my machines have already been "optimized" for my set-up, and because I KNOW better!
If you are a "Tech Novice", (and that's a wonderful thing to BE in many cases, believe it or not), then ask someone you know who has knowledge about it BEFORE you make any changes, or read up on it on Microsoft's Knowledge Base site, or, or...
You get the idea: "Research it 1st, and you won't be sorry later"...
...And to the person who said "You start the machine and it opens 8...(connections)? Sounds like there's something major wrong..."
No, there isn't, and here's why, so let's count them off:
You need ONE to "talk " to the SCREEN,
you need ANOTHER for the KEYBOARD,
you need at least TWO for a single Networking adaptor; (if you have a NIC + a modem, it'll want at least 4 to 40),
Speakers? that's another one or two (you DO like stereo, right?),
...and so on....
I'm amazed they only had 8 on startup! Oh, I forgot the Hard Drive, any CD/DVD drives, any Floppy, the USB ports, a Printer Port (that's two, it's bi-directional at the very least), if you've got any Serial Ports, that's another two each minimum, + any FireWire ports, HDMI port, and a plethora of other ports & things hat start up which most of us don't even NEED, like when I got my Vista 64-bit machine, it starts up the Services for a Tablet PC, (and this is NOT a "Tablet" machine at all), which wastes a LOT of my machine's resources right of the bat & never gets used!...
You see, each & every thing that the machine's "basic brain bus" has to "talk to" needs at least one or two channels for EACH thing it's going to send or get info to & from, so after you've "been under the hood" of computers for awhile, you start getting like me - amazed that anything higher than an old 4.77-MHz XT-Class machine could start & run with only 8 'channels' open!
And you can blame that one squarely on Microsoft, since it's the Operating Platform (pre-Win-2000, Windows was NOT an Operating SYSTEM, it had to boot DOS first, & it ran "on top", while with Win2000 & later, it became a "real" Operating SYSTEM), although considering that my (very) old machines used only 10k to 16k for the entire OS & worked just fine, I'll never know why Windows needs multi-megabytes just to RUN, and if your hard drive is anything less than a couple of Gigabytes, it's too small for anything useful, but I digress -
Anything to do with setting your ports to help P2P speeds will be machine-specific, so you'll need to try several sets of settings before you find what works best for you, but personally, I'd NEVER trust a "patch", (read: "Script"), to mess with something so low-level as my TCP/IP settings, without my knowing what's going on, or at least, having it print (or save to a text-file) what the settings WERE, & what it changed them TO.
Good luck!

Actually, 8 is a VERY LOW number of "TCP" connections for ANY Windows-based machine (or even DOS) to make upon startup, and here's WHY:
Sometimes a connection is routed through the TCP/IP stack just because it's easier to do for the programmer who wrote the old, initial OS at the time;
Other times, it only "looks" like they're going through the TCP/IP ports, and sometimes they really ARE, but it's to IP "", which is the machine's own "loopback" port address, so they're really "internal connections";
Now, let's see just how many of these "internal connections" a machine needs to have, in order to get some very basic operating abilities, ok?
First, you need a "Write-only" port to the Screen, so you can see what it's doing...
SO, we've just used 1 "connection" so we can se what we're doing (or what the machine's doing, whatever);
Now, we need to be able to "talk" to the thing, so we open another connection, this one is a "Read" connection to the Keyboard;
That's TWO; If we've got ANY kind of sound (other than the old XT-class "beep"), we'll need another one or two (some systems mux one "connection" & get stereo, others will "eat" two connections, one for each channel; Now, if you've worked with the "modern-day" fancy sound systems, you'll know that if you've got "real" Stereo, you've got everything you need to decode all channels of sound up through the 5.1 (or "7.1"), so those don't add anything, so that's another one or two;
...And we need to have something to have the Operating System ON, which gets read into mamory ('cause RAM is faster than anything else in the hardware, at least for now), so we've got either a Floppy (antique) or a HDD, so that's another couple of "connections", & until SATA, the typical ESDI-506 HDD needed two cables: 1 for Control (two connections, commands & responses), and 1 for Data (at least one connection, but usually two, even though data only went one direction at a time, so if you really wanted to, you COULD write an OS that used ONE "connection" for the Data part of the HDD connections);
...With Serial ATA (SATA), we still have Cmmand/Response & Data-In/Data-Out, but we just have much faster CPUs, so we can either write our OS to use lots of machine cycles switching between "Read/Write" & "Cmd/Resp.", or we can eat another pair per function, two for Command/Response & another pair for Read Data/Write Data; I honestly don't know how it's done anymore, but we know that there are at LEAST two connections to the "non-volatile data storage system", sowe have to add in at least those two;
...(Or however many are REALLY used nowadays; You can tell I'm getting a little "Long in the tooth", but I still remember the "original" microprocessor, the 4004 from Intel, a 4-bit chip, & I've still got a portable "Ham" radio that uses two of them - one to make the LCD display work, and the other to run the PLL that tells the radio the frequency I want it to stay on, & when to change that for the "offset" - If any of that last is confusing, read "The Radio Amateur's Handbook" or Google W1AW, 'cause I'm not going to eat up more space here trying to make a ham operator out of you, no offense intended)...
And then there's the modem, (most machines have one, even if you never USE it, and that's at LEAST two to several dozen, depends on the chipset it uses)...
...OK, you say you didn't put IN a Modem card?, Great! You'll have a NIC instead, so you can connect to an Ethernet cable & get your broadband DSL or whatever, & you'll maybe have a WiFi card too, and each of THOSE take up almost as many "connections" as you can spare, depending on just how big the internal buffers are on the cards, {or in the chipsets}, and you'll really eat them fast, especially if you're using a laptop, or are running a big "desktop-replacement laptop", (the WiFi needs several for the data going in each direction, and then there's the NIC for the Ethernet, or the Modem, or both, or all 3, and each of those uses "connections" that are "kind of dedicated"), {Thank goodness for "IRQ-sharing"!}...
...And if you plug your laptop into a "port expander", that >may< take up from one to a zillion "connections per port" that it "expands",
...(Unless you've got a really nice hardware budget, and you got a Port Expander that takes care of its own "connection-multiplying" with a mux chip inside it, so it only needs a few to a dozen or so connections, depending on how many things it DOES, or lets YOU do)...
So far, we're up to quite a few, and if you leave out the ones for the laptop stuff & anything other than Screen, Keyboard, HDD, floppy or one USB, & a Printer (USB or older Centronix, which are both going to be two-way connections each anyway), that's only to boot into DOS, and you can leave out the Sound and STILL easily come up with 8;
(And with the sound, that's at LEAST one & more likely two more, but often a "sound card" will use more than that, since the "game controller" lives on that card, if they still put those things in; I notice my newest machine's got a million USB ports);
If your machine has a "game controller port" on it, that's at least two more, usally several more for different axes of a joystick or whatever...
...but I know I use at least two, since I use my "game controller" port for my MIDI-In & MIDI-Out cable, (which is a nice, sedentary, one-way 31.5-kHz per plug or socket connection, but it needs to "feed through", so that's two, I can't "get away" with just one & "strobe" it, the music wouldn't sound so good!)...
I'll spare you the details of all the other places & things (Mouse, any serial ports, Printer/USB's/etc.), and just point out that if you're running anything much more than "bare-bones Free-Dos", you're going to have to have quite a few "connections" open, just so the machine can start up & run enough to put the little "C:>_" on the screen...
Now, lets say that you're like a zillion other people, (I'm not trying to make any judgements or to discredit anyone here, {I'm one of these people myself, much as I hate to admit it}, and I'm just using numbers from the "Trade Papers" & the Gov't, & the Gov't doesn't lie to us, now DO they?)...
...and we'll figure that you're running some version of "Windows";
...Wow, do YOU have a LOT of things running that you probably don't even KNOW about!
...(I was sure surprised to see just how much stuff is going on "behind MY back" on this newfangled machine I've got!)...
When I got this machine I'm typing on right now, with 64-bit Vista Home Premium "pre-installed" on it, I found the entire host of "services", (that's 'computer-speak' for "little program-lets that let the machine take care of something it needs to, so it can work"), which are ALL for a "Tablet"-PC, (and I didn't BUY a Tablet PC, it's NOT a Tablet PC, and I'm STILL finding "services" that run at startup & that I'm STILL removing to give me more room on the HDD & to speed things up, since there's NO reason TO run all of those Services for the Tablet PC when it isn't a Tablet machine, so there's NO Touch-Screen or Light-Pen, etc., etc.)...
See how fast we got up to well over 80, which is over 10 times the 8 you say is "way bad"?
I agree that it's "Way Bad", by all means, but that's where things go a lot of the time, and it's because coding in Assembler has gone the way of the 6502 MPU, and the ONLY way to write truly tight, efficient code is to do it in the machine's native language, which is actually "1's & 0's", but I'll give Steve Gibson a break & let his calling Assembler "the machine's native language" slide this time, since it DOES get "translated" down to the "1011001100010100" that a 16-bit CPU would understand to either mean something for it to DO, use for an address, or see as something that's not in it's table of Instruction Codes & refuse to run it...
...(In the old days, if a programmer told a 6502 to do something that it wasn't made to do, either it's "lock up", usually putting pretty patterns on the screen, or it may actually DO something, which were called "Undocumented Features" if ALL of the chips did it; If only SOME did it, it was a "fluke" & we didn't use it 'cause it wasn't reliable enough)...
...And we've been using 32-bit machines, (mostly, anyway), for many years now, so the 16-bit example is "good enough" to illustrate why just about no one, (except Steve Gibson, bless him!), writes in "Machine Language" anymore...

...I shudder to think of keeping track of all of those 1's & 0's in just a single 64-bit instruction or address!
That's why there are 32-bit (most common), and (newer) 64-bit CPUs out there now, and with the Dual-"core" through "Quad"-"core", & up thru 8-"core" CPUs, it's no wonder that there's no longer any external Floating Point Co-Processor, {which was called the "Math Co-Proc.", "back in the day" of the 80286/386, and I THINK 80486};
The "Pentium" was "named" instead of "numbered" because, for one of many reasons I'm sure, Intel got tired of the "clone"-makers using their chip-numbers, (which can't really be copyrighted), and went to a name, (after the "486", the next would've been "586" and "5"="Penta", hence the "Pentium", a name, (which CAN be copyrighted, and was!).
...So, now you see that it's Microsoft that's opening up all of those "connections", so you might as well blame them...
I know the rest of us usually do! They're used to it by now! :)

i've tried this and it's so amazing ! it works so well with my speed ! THX

As various other people have already mentioned, no, you shouldn't rely on alot of things you see on the net. Yes, this particular tweak does work. You'll notice websites coming up much faster in your browser after applying it.

All people considering getting this patch. I personally tried this and it actually slowed down my dowload speed. I would not recommend it. You may have a different outcome though so good luck ;)

I wondered why my Internet was so slow after applying SP3. I ran this program (yes, you shouldn't run strange programs you see on the Net as a rule, etc) and it cleared up my issues. Now everything is back to working smooth.

this program will not affect download or internet speeds per se. it fixes a problem where SOME users will reach the security limit of 10 half open TCP connections. you can easily check if this problem affects you by having a look in the system event log (right click on "my computer", go to "manage" then open "event viewer" and choose "system" log).

if you are reaching the default security limit, you will see an entry "TCPIP" with the ID of 4226. double click this to open it, and you will see the error message "TCP/IP has reached the security limit imposed on the number of concurrent TCP connect attempts."

ONLY if you can find this error message will the above patch help you. mostly only P2P and torrent software will reach this limit anyway. if you don't see this error message, then you are not reaching the limit, so there's no point in increasing this limit.

also, there is nothing that can harm your system by changing this limit. it was a "new feature" in service pack 1 - it didn't even exist prior to that - and was introduced to slow down the spread of worms which commonly open many hundreds of TCP connections at once. unfortunately some (mainly P2P) programs also open many TCP connections at once, and these programs are affected by this limit.

and the above poster who claims his download speeds became worse after applying this patch likely has a worm or trojan running that he/she is unaware of, which is now allowed to make a higher number of connections and so use up more bandwidth. there's no way that increasing this value can by itself slow down your connection (and the only way that it could slow down your connection is if you decreased this limit to something even lower than 10).

in any case, a better version of this patch can be found at the website, that guy wrote the original version and that one seems to work in more cases than the one posted here.

Thanks for provding an alternate TCP/IP patcher ( not saying theres anything wrong with theone on this website ).

Your one of the few people who know what there on about ;) Incredible how much utter nonsense people have been posting about alternative solutions when they dont understand what this patch does and why and then demonstrate to everyone else just what little they know in pages worth of rank amateur babble.

Thanks man!
work perfectly

will this trick work on windows 7 too?

doesn't work and is not needed in windows 7


Anonymous wrote, "in any case, a better version of this patch can be found at the website, that guy wrote the original version and that one seems to work in more cases than the one posted here."

Yes, most of us tried that before coming here. But SP2 and SP3 have different TCPIP.sys files. LVLLord's patch was for XP SP2, and it will crash an XP SP3 system. Also, attempting to mod "0A 00 00 00" to "00 00 0A 00" in the SP3 TCPIP.sys file doesn't work either. Dunno why... it just fails.

So, if the patch here works for you, go for it. If LVLLord's patch works for you, more power 2ya. But don't mix them up.

XP SP3 => megaleecher
XP SP2 => LVLLord

I've been really impressed with this site! Good Luck!

Vinyl Siding

Since August 2009 web pages were loaded after 20 seconds upto 2 minutes.
MS fixit 50199 of the TCP/IP stack sometimes solved the problem for some period of time.
I intended to buy a new computer (I have a P3, 550 Mhz, 512 MB RAM).
However after running this TCP/IP patch both connecting to web pages and email server is very fast again.
I think MS tries to push older XP versions out of the market in favor of windows 7!

the limit of concurrent user connections to my SQL server is 10 in WinXP-SP3, the patch didn't help incresing the number of concurrent connections,

any guidance?

All I know is my internet is flying after using this patch! AWESOME!

When i try to run it, a pop up says "windows does not need a patch" how can I get around this?

help please im worried as i followed a friends advise and run this patch but now in the low right hand corner is a notice test mode windows 7, build 7600. has this patch caused an error and if so is there any way i can cancell the patch thanks for any help much appreciated as im verry much a novice with computers Carmine

There's another class of software that needs this patch.

Proxy servers.

Most people talking about it talk about P2P. Proxy servers are however very common in home and corp networks, and it's not uncommon to be run on XP. In fact for our product WinGate, about 50% of installs are on XP.

We recommend this patch very often for people experiencing this particular problem. The fact that a windows event log is written when this problem occurs means you can be certain if you are experiencing this problem or not.

This problem causes real difficulties for proxies, who are opening connections on behalf of clients, and so can easily be opening many connections at any time (and therefore have 10 half-open connections).

Note that the problem is only a limitation of HALF-open connections. This is not a limitation of total connections (which you can set in windows tcpip registry settings). HALF-open connections were singled out by MS because in their (IMO misguided) view, this was more likely to be happening when you have some malware opening lots of connections to spread viruses.

A half-open connection differs from a fully-open connection. With TCP 3-way handshake, a half open connection is one where the initial (SYN) packet has been sent by your computer (to request a connection) but not acknowledged (SYN ACK packet) by the server.

Note that ONLY XP suffers from this. The person who tried it on 2003 will not benefit. 2003 does not have a limit on half-open connections. Maybe they want us to buy server OSes.

Also it was introduced in SP2 not SP1.


Just Magic ..!

Count one more "Thank you' for this patch. Working on XP SP3 even with latest patches up-to-this date nov.2011.

how do I figure out my limit (i.e. change limit to____"


Please help me with this.
Thanks so very much.

I guarantee this works. I was pissed for hours trying to figure out why the Service Pack 3 totally screwed my internet connection. I did a half a days searching and was VERY CLOSE to uninstalling XP SP3 when I found this post.

My internet is much faster now. My issue was that FileZilla and FF, IE, Safari was so slow I could not get any work completed. As a web designer I was spending 1/2 my time trying to get FileZilla to upload files to the client domain and it just took for freakin ever.

Use this tool, set it to 256 and you are golden.

This happened-After installing this patcher my internet speed slowed....How do i remove it? It is not being displayed in control panel => Add remove programs...What's the other method of removing it?

Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) is the most popular network protocol, and the basis for the Internet. Its routing capabilities provide maximum flexibility in an enterprise-wide network. In Windows XP TCP/IP is automatically installed. Do not need any patch!

Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP) is the most popular network protocol, and the basis for the Internet. Its routing capabilities provide maximum flexibility in an enterprise-wide network. In Windows XP TCP/IP is automatically installed. Do not need any patch!

TCPIP.SYS needs a patch! Because Windows limit to 10 conections.
The tool is excellent!

The megaleecher xp sp3 patcher not working on windows xp sp3 hungarian version.
The patch display 50 connection, but the "net config server" in cmd window only 10...
Not working....

Thx a lot .... this helped me a lot for performance testing.

does this patch work on win 7???

No Troll, it is for XP SP3

No Dumb_Ass, it is for XP SP3!

Add new comment

This is just one of the many helpful tips we have posted, You can find more stories here,
Do subscribe to updates using your favorite RSS feed reader or using the secure FeedBurner email update form on top of this post.