what is XP network connection limit?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ToddAndMargo
  • Start date Start date
T

ToddAndMargo

Hi All,

I have ~ 65 computers running Kaspersky's Communications
Client with network connections to an XP-Pro-SP3 machine
running Kaspersky's Amdinistartion Kit. Three of the last
computers I configured to read the Admin kit refuse to
communicate with the Kit (Kaspersky error message: physical
network error).

It has been suggested to me that I have reached the
maximum connection limit to the Admin Kit. Does anyone
know what the network connection limit is on XP-Pro-SP3?

And, is there a way to increase it?

Many thanks,
-T
 
ToddAndMargo said:
Hi All,

I have ~ 65 computers running Kaspersky's Communications
Client with network connections to an XP-Pro-SP3 machine
running Kaspersky's Amdinistartion Kit. Three of the last
computers I configured to read the Admin kit refuse to
communicate with the Kit (Kaspersky error message: physical
network error).

It has been suggested to me that I have reached the
maximum connection limit to the Admin Kit. Does anyone
know what the network connection limit is on XP-Pro-SP3?

And, is there a way to increase it?

Many thanks,
-T
Click to expand...

The limit for concurrent network connections to an XP Pro host is 10, and
can't be increased. You'd need a Windows server to do this....IMO, 65
workstations is far too many to manage in a workgroup environment anyway (a
domain is so much easier to manage).
 
Lanwench said:
The limit for concurrent network connections to an XP Pro host is 10, and
can't be increased. You'd need a Windows server to do this....IMO, 65
workstations is far too many to manage in a workgroup environment anyway (a
domain is so much easier to manage).
Click to expand...

The only function this XP machine has is the Kaspersky Admin Kit.

I may misunderstand something here. I thought the 10 network
connections was for 10 file shares. I thought there was a
much higher number for connections to a (non file sharing)
network service? (I get away with about 60 connections
to the Admin Kit.)

Am I missing something?

-T
 
ToddAndMargo said:
Hi Jack,

Don't care much for sbs servers: they have built in domain
controller, whether or not you want one.
Click to expand...

Yes, you have to run SBS as a DC & it must hold all the FSMO roles.
(I find them
to be a total, instable pain in the ass.)
Click to expand...

Not if you set them up & administer them properly. Same is true for any
system.
I will go with
the simplest, straight 2008 server I can find.
Click to expand...

I'd still recommend a domain model - thinking about a 65-computer workgroup
gives me a headache.
 
Hi Jack,

Don't care much for sbs servers: they have built in domain
controller, whether or not you want one. (I find them
to be a total, instable pain in the ass.) I will go with
the simplest, straight 2008 server I can find.

Thank you for the heads up,
-T
Click to expand...

Actually I have a new client who claims to have set up an SBS server as
a workgroup-only server. I haven't looked at it yet so I'm not sure
what they did.

In any event we support a lot of SBS installations that are entirely
stable.

If you really want to manage 65 users in a workgroup environment though
I guess that's up to you. Sounds like "a total, instable, pain in the
ass" to me though. :-)


-Ben-
Ben M. Schorr, MVP
Roland Schorr & Tower
http://www.rolandschorr.com
http://www.officeforlawyers.com
Author - The Lawyer's Guide to Microsoft Outlook 2007:
http://tinyurl.com/5m3f5q
 
Ben said:
Actually I have a new client who claims to have set up an SBS server
as a workgroup-only server. I haven't looked at it yet so I'm not
sure what they did.
Click to expand...

If they did manage to do it so that it's not throwing up errors and shutting
down every few hours, they're at the very least in violation of the EULA.
In any event we support a lot of SBS installations that are entirely
stable.
Click to expand...

Yup, me too.
If you really want to manage 65 users in a workgroup environment
though I guess that's up to you. Sounds like "a total, instable,
pain in the ass" to me though. :-)
Click to expand...

Amen, bruddah.
 
Lanwench said:
If they did manage to do it so that it's not throwing up errors and shutting
down every few hours, they're at the very least in violation of the EULA.

Yup, me too.
Click to expand...

Dudes! I am only describing the roll of the XP server
that administers the Kaspersky Admin Kit. There are
several other servers on the network who's rolls I
am not describing.

I am only looking for the maximum (not file sharing)
network connections to XP. And, yes it is my fault
everyone got off topic by taking a swipe at SBS
server. Could we get back on topic?

Many thanks,
-T
 
ToddAndMargo said:
Dudes! I am only describing the roll of the XP server
Click to expand...

Youch....if it's rolling, you have other problems. And let's put the word
"server" in double quotes if it's immediately prefaced by the letters "XP"
;-)
that administers the Kaspersky Admin Kit. There are
several other servers on the network who's rolls I
am not describing.

I am only looking for the maximum (not file sharing)
network connections to XP.
Click to expand...

For anything that uses the server service, it's 10. See
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314882.

If Kaspersky's admin tools are designed to run on XP in a workgroup perhaps
you should check with their support.
And, yes it is my fault
everyone got off topic by taking a swipe at SBS
server. Could we get back on topic?
Click to expand...

You need a server...hence our digression. Caveat emptor in usenet ;-)
 
Lanwench said:
Youch....if it's rolling, you have other problems. And let's put the word
"server" in double quotes if it's immediately prefaced by the letters "XP"
;-)
Click to expand...

"server" here is describing a function, not a trade mark.
For anything that uses the server service, it's 10. See
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314882.
Click to expand...

Kaspersky does not use the Server service. This is not
file sharing. As far as I can tell, it is one socket
talking to another. From the registry,

"13000:TCP"="13000:TCP:*:Enabled:Kaspersky 13000 TCP"
"14000:TCP"="14000:TCP:*:Enabled:Kaspersky 14000 TCP"
"15000:UDP"="15000:UDP:*:Enabled:Kaspersky 15000 UDP"

If that helps.

If Kaspersky's admin tools are designed to run on XP in a workgroup perhaps
you should check with their support.
Click to expand...

I have. No answer. Figured you guys had more knowledge.

You need a server...hence our digression. Caveat emptor in usenet ;-)
Click to expand...

Not using file sharing. XP is a much simpler and less expensive
system. I want to stick with XP if I can for this server (function
not trade mark). Speed/performance is not an issue.

Many thanks,
-T
 
ToddAndMargo said:
Not using file sharing. XP is a much simpler and less expensive
system. I want to stick with XP if I can for this server (function
not trade mark). Speed/performance is not an issue.
Click to expand...

I should probably note here that this Admin Kit is running
as a Virtual Machine (Virtual Box). I did ask them (VBox) if
the VM's networking (host networking) was the cause of
the "Physical Network Error" but they said "no".

I really do not want the extra complication and expense
of an addition Windows Server (trade mark this time)
if I can avoid it.

-T
 
If they did manage to do it so that it's not throwing up errors and shutting
down every few hours, they're at the very least in violation of the EULA.
Click to expand...

It may well be throwing errors and shutting down, if in fact they
succeeded in doing what they claim they've done. They're on another
island and I haven't gotten over there to look at the server yet.
Probably next week.


-Ben-
Ben M. Schorr, MVP
Roland Schorr & Tower
http://www.rolandschorr.com
http://www.officeforlawyers.com
Author - The Lawyer's Guide to Microsoft Outlook 2007:
http://tinyurl.com/5m3f5q
 
Back
Top