From: grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se   
      
   On Mon, 2015-02-02, rocky303@gmail.com wrote:   
   > On Friday, May 8, 2009 at 4:47:53 AM UTC+2, Barry Margolin wrote:   
   >> In article <>,   
   >>  Jorgen Grahn <> wrote:   
   >>   
   >> > On Wed, 6 May 2009 07:38:00 -0700 (PDT), David Schwartz   
   >> > <> wrote:   
   >> > > On May 5, 9:16???pm, Barry Margolin  wrote:   
   >> > >   
   >> > >> Do you know this for a fact, or are you just guessing?   
   >> > >   
   >> > > I know for a fact that his code is broken and it's giving him problems   
   >> > > other people don't have. The only way to prove causality is for him to   
   >> > > fix his code and demonstrate that he still has the problem. He has to   
   >> > > fix it anyway.   
   >> > >   
   >> > >>???Why does it   
   >> > >> return this error code in that case, surely there must be a more   
   >> > >> appropriate code, since this has nothing to do with permissions.   
   >> > >   
   >> > > It has everything to do with permissions. Only 'root' is permitted to   
   >> > > use network resources in anti-social ways. Ordinary users are subject   
   >> > > to rational limits.   
   >> >   
   >> > You need to provide references for this I think ...   
   >>   
   >> I'd also like to see that.  I've never heard of any Unix-type system   
   >> that checks for "anti-social" behavior.  Either you have permission to   
   >> use a resource or you don't.  While it's certainly possible to implement   
   >> rate limiting in the network driver, I've never heard of Linux actually   
   >> doing so, certainly not by default.   
      
   > Sorry for resurrecting an old thread, but I see this error on   
   > day-to-day basis and it has everything to do that I am sending UDP   
   > packets without rate control. What is interesting is that - at least   
   > on my testing servers - if we turn off iptables completely we don't   
   > witness this problem. I wonder is iptables somehow causing EPERM.   
      
   You'd have to describe your own problem -- most people won't have   
   access to those postings from 2009, and the technical details aren't   
   present in the part you quote above.   
      
   > I don't know are Google Groups the right venue for sending this   
   > email. Hoping that somebody will see this :)   
      
   We see it.  But this is not Google Groups -- this is USENET.   
   GG is just (barely) a gateway to it.   
      
   /Jorgen   
      
   --   
     // Jorgen Grahn    O  o   .   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)