1/31    Help, I can't get UDP up!!  I've got RedHat 5.2, how do I make
        sure IP Filtering is turned off?  Tom needs my BB!  -mtbb
        UDP
        "UDP connection request timed out"
        \_ Install a real OS like 95/98/NT that you have a chance of dealing
           with at your level of fu.
           \_ Screw that.  My Win98 box won't do UDP either.  Quiet, you.
              And I wouldn't start in with "level of fu" with me if you're
              wise.  I'm no mehlhaff, but I know a thing or two.  --sowings
        \_ Oh phooey.  I've only spent the last half-year trying to get
           my non-WinblowsMe to the point where it can connect to an ISP
                \_ You are an idiot.
           thru ISDN.  That frikk'n 'gated' daemon problem took me days to
           solve.. but I finally got that hacked.  Now, I've got some
                \_ Days?  You are an idiot.
           nimwit who thinx I should go and donate more bux to the Food For
           Bill Fund.  One-der-Full.  I don't even have a BS in networking.
                \_ With an OS at your Fu Level, it would've taken 30 minutes
                   at most.  Even for you.
           I'll figure it out myself... it just takes time and I was kind
           of hoping somebuddy could help me out here.  *waaah*  -mtbb
           \_ Obviously not.  It was too hard.  Now if you had chosen an
              easier to support OS....
           \_ A real OS doesn't crash and burn every 12 hours.  Even NT sucks.
                \_ If you crash NT every 12 hours then you must be doing
                 \_ Obviously they're not teaching interface design classes.
                    The 95/NT is mediocre but at least it works.
                   something stupid like installing random crap off the net
                \_ Mostly.  And your point is?
                   as an admin.  Anyway, the original poster still needs an
                   OS for clueless people.  95/98/NT will play his netrek
                   without the need for a PhD in networking.  You are an
                   idiot.
                   \_ I managed to get NT to panic as a non-super user.
                      Now, that's pretty sad.
           \_ Are you saying Linux isn't a real OS?
              \_ People just like to ridicule Linux as being a fake OS
                 because they're too lazy to replace their prepackaged
                    \_ Linux will never take over as long as the interface
                       sucks and it requires a CS geek to get running.  Or
                       in this case a CS geek is appealing to other CS geeks
                       for help (and still hasn't gotten any, btw).
                 shrink wrapped OS's with something real.  And every
                 semester, yet another 162/61C prof shows what a great
                 example of an operating system Linux is and how horribly
                 designed Microsoft operating systems are.  But who are we
                 to listen to people like Dave Patterson and Culler.
                 They know nothing about system software.  They only spent
                 the last 20 years studying about them.
           \_ Isn't Win95 just DOS with a graphical interfact on top of it?
           \_ just out of curiosity, how do people here compare OS2 with
              win95/NT?
              \_ OS/2 is a real OS from the ground up, Win95 is just a
                 graphical shell on top of DOS.  Don't know much about NT,
                 but I guess it's real too (although it sucks.)
                 \_ It's so funny how so many awesome operating systems
                    that are 10x better than Windows have failed to
                    dominate the PC markert.  Hopefully linux will succeed
                    since M$ will have nobody to sue this time.
           \_ It's funny how M$ talks about their "OS"es:
              When Win3.1 came out: "You can have multitasking with Win3.1!"
              When Win95 came out: "You can have preemptive multitasking
                with 95!"
              When NT came out: "You can have true multitasking with NT!"
                \_ I was told that NT = VMS.  Is this true?
                   \_ I think it's because Dave Cutler (?), one of the
                      main VMS guys, was hired by M$ to put together NT.
                      also, I don't know if it's an urban legend, but
                      supposedly VMS + 1 = WNT.  Har har.  -John
                      \_ cutler was at dec west working on the then next
                         generation processor + os.  I think it was called
                         spectrum or something (it was many years ago, and
                         i have reclaimed the storage for that stuff).  dec
                         canned that project in favor of mips, and the hw
                         side of the team went off to do alpha, which ended
                         up killing mips inside dec.  most of the sw side of
                         the team went with cutler to microsoft to do nt.
                         according to people who claim to know, nt has
                         striking similarities to the cancelled dec work.
              Er ... so what multitasking was I getting in 3.1 again?
              \_ synchronous time division multiplexing
                 \_ It works OK with nice, well-behaved programs (like the
                    ones that DON'T come with Win 3.1)
           \_ Sega Dreamcast uses Windows CE. That's freaky.
           \_ If you were dealing with FreeBSD I could answer your question
              better, sine I know how its ipfw setup works.  Basically, you
              need to remove IP filtering from the kernel, or just give it
              the barest set of forwarding rules.  Usuallly this is:
                /sbin/ipfw add 65000 pass all from any to any
                                                --sowings