remote wake from sleep - Page 2

bluehz · 05-05-2003, 01:22 PM

Cool - let us know how it works. I am still dumbfounded I actually got it to work. I swear I have tried probably 100 times at various site over the last 2-3 years and never once has it worked....

Phil St. Romain · 05-06-2003, 02:25 PM

bluehz, no luck!

I think I set up port forwarding on the router to only the LAN IP address of my iMac, which is a state address. I'll try referring to the whole subnet and see if that makes a difference. I'm just noticing in your directions that you emphasize this.

bluehz · 05-06-2003, 02:57 PM

From what I read when machine is asleep it no longer has an identifiable IP address thats why they say you have to broadcast to your whole subnet. So every machine gets the signal to wake, but only the one with the actual matching MAC address accepts the command.

Quote:


	Originally posted by Phil St. Romain bluehz, no luck! I think I set up port forwarding on the router to only the LAN IP address of my iMac, which is a state address. I'll try referring to the whole subnet and see if that makes a difference. I'm just noticing in your directions that you emphasize this.

djn1 · 05-06-2003, 05:51 PM

Quote:


	Originally posted by bluehz 4. Setup Port Forwarding on the Router Most online wake utilities use UDP port 9, so you need to set up your router to forward UDP port 9 to the whole internal LAN - your broadcast address. For me this means port forwarding all udp request on port 9 to 192.168.1.255. Some online wake utilities allow you to choose a port to send the packets on - if you desire - choose another port and open UDP traffic on it appropriately. The secret here is to have the port broadcast the UDP signal on that port to your whole subnet - in my case 192.168.1.255.

This is probably a stupid question but how do you work out what your broadcast address is? My router's internal ip is 192.168.0.1 and my machine is 192.168.0.2 but when I try to configure the router to port-forward to 192.168.0.255 it generates an error -"Invalid IP address". Am I missing something obvious?

bluehz · 05-06-2003, 06:32 PM

No - that is the correct broadcast address.... hmmm... wonder what thats about.... let me look into it.... hope its not a "feature of D-Link" routers since I just bought one.

EDIT
I am seeing a few reports of other not being able to set that address either, but its not necessarily brand related and no solution is listed.

How are you trying to port forward? I think the proper way in your D-Link router is via Virtual Servers settings. Not sure how helpful this is... but I just discovered that D-Link has a really nice emulator on their site, I went in and messed around with it and it let me set the address to UDP/9 192.168.0.255.... but then again it is just an emulator. Nice feature of website.
http://support.dlink.com/techtool/di...ator/login.htm

djn1 · 05-06-2003, 06:59 PM

Quote:


	Originally posted by bluehz No - that is the correct broadcast address.... hmmm... wonder what thats about.... let me look into it.... hope its not a "feature of D-Link" routers since I just bought one.

It may be that I'm doing something wrong with one of the other router settings (though I've left most of them alone). I've put a screenshot on my iDisk (broadcast.pdf, www.homepage.mac.com/djn1) that shows the settings and the error dialog. I can't see anything wrong with the way I've done this but you might want to take a look and see if anything strikes you.

[edit] the error dialog appears after I click the modify button.[/edit]

mervTormel · 05-06-2003, 07:07 PM

hosts 0 and 255 are reserved.

a broadcast address is 255.255.255.255

you don't want to forward anything to the broadcast address. the incoming packets should already have the broadcast address.

i think

bluehz · 05-06-2003, 07:25 PM

Merv - according to the wake-on-lan crowd you HAVE to send the signal to the broadcast address for your subnet... thats the only way it will work.

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wake...nlan~mode=shut

djn1 · 05-06-2003, 07:37 PM

Did you notice that there were a couple of people in the first thread who reported that they couldn't set their routers to the broadcast address?

bluehz · 05-06-2003, 07:42 PM

Yes - I noticed that BUT I never saw an explaination or solution... ain't forums great..... hahaha..

also - did a rather extensive search and could find no info regarding it being illegal to set address to 192.168.0.255. It looks like your settings are correct as far as I can tell from PDF. I doubt this has anything to do with it, and I know nothing about it - but what is the SSID stuff that has to do with wireless. It does some sort of broadcasting and I am wondering if it has reserved the *.255 for itself. I had no problems at all setting 192.168.0.255 on my old Linksys.

djn1 · 05-06-2003, 07:51 PM

Quote:


	Originally posted by bluehz but what is the SSID stuff that has to do with wireless. It does some sort of broadcasting and I am wondering if it has reserved the *.255 for itself. I had no problems at all setting 192.168.0.255 on my old Linksys.

I don't know

bluehz · 05-06-2003, 08:00 PM

I have been reading that it is customary to reserve the 192.168.0.255 address for broadcast - this is a given. You technically should never use that address for anything... for example you would never want to assign that to a machine... so I am wondering if the router is imposing some error checking basically saying "nice try - but I'm not going to let you use that address". If so that would be a bummer - because you are NOT assigning that address to anything - you are just opening the pipe for that address to get through the router so it should have no effect. Is there a free tech support phone for your router?

djn1 · 05-06-2003, 08:07 PM

Quote:


	Originally posted by bluehz Is there a free tech support phone for your router?

I don't know - I'll check it out tomorrow - it's 1am here :yawn

stetner · 05-07-2003, 08:38 AM

Your broadcast address depends on what your subnetmask is. (You might want to check what the router has as its mask, although I cannot see it making a difference in this case)

If your subnet mask is 255.255.255.0 and you network address is 192.168.0.0 then your broadcast address is 192.168.0.255. Valid addresses are 192.168.0.1-192.168.0.254 inclusive.

If your subnet mask is 255.255.254.0 and you network address is 192.168.0.0 then your broadcast address is 192.168.1.255. Valid addresses are 192.168.0.1-192.168.1.254 inclusive, including 192.168.0.255 as a valid address.

There is nothing inherently magic about the 0 or 255 addresses. The highest and lowest address on the network are reserved though.

whatmask is a useful utility for this (gui version:whatmask)

Code:

% whatmaskcli 192.168.0.1/255.255.255.0

------------------------------------------------
           TCP/IP NETWORK INFORMATION
------------------------------------------------
IP Entered = ..................: 192.168.0.1
CIDR = ........................: /24
Netmask = .....................: 255.255.255.0
Wildcard Bits = ...............: 0.0.0.255
------------------------------------------------
Network Address = .............: 192.168.0.0
Broadcast Address = ...........: 192.168.0.255
Usable IP Addresses = .........: 254
First Usable IP Address = .....: 192.168.0.1
Last Usable IP Address = ......: 192.168.0.254

% whatmaskcli 192.168.0.1/255.255.254.0

------------------------------------------------
           TCP/IP NETWORK INFORMATION
------------------------------------------------
IP Entered = ..................: 192.168.0.1
CIDR = ........................: /23
Netmask = .....................: 255.255.254.0
Wildcard Bits = ...............: 0.0.1.255
------------------------------------------------
Network Address = .............: 192.168.0.0
Broadcast Address = ...........: 192.168.1.255
Usable IP Addresses = .........: 510
First Usable IP Address = .....: 192.168.0.1
Last Usable IP Address = ......: 192.168.1.254

Your PDF shows that you are already mapping port 9. Could that be the problem (along with an unclear error message)?

edit: PS. ipcalc is pretty cool too

bluehz · 05-07-2003, 08:41 AM

stetner - do you think it may be that the router has idiotproofed the high/low addresses to prevent people from using them? Thats the only thing I can figure - I had no problem setting my router to *255 setting, but I read on the DSLreports forums about people trying to do the WOL and they too could not set address to *255. I am thinking the routers are confined to the useable addresses - just to keep people from getting in trouble.

BTW - thx for the whatmask info - I was looking for something like that to mention in my instructions on using WOL. I'm going to submit the WOL tip to the main MacOSXHints - I hope you don't mind if I include the "whatmask" info also...

I just noticed I already have the "whatmask" binary installed - do you know if that comes pre-installed with OS X or is it something I compiled and added at some point?

stetner · 05-07-2003, 09:36 AM

Quote:


	Originally posted by bluehz stetner - do you think it may be that the router has idiotproofed the high/low addresses to prevent people from using them?

I would hope not, but some of these low end routers do have some restrictions built in, so I guess only the manufacturer would know...

Quote:


	Thats the only thing I can figure - I had no problem setting my router to 255 setting, but I read on the DSLreports forums about people trying to do the WOL and they too could not set address to 255.

Yeah, no problem here either (Netgear).

Quote:


	BTW - thx for the whatmask info - I was looking for something like that to mention in my instructions on using WOL. I'm going to submit the WOL tip to the main MacOSXHints - I hope you don't mind if I include the "whatmask" info also...

Not at all, I just googled for it...

Quote:


	I just noticed I already have the "whatmask" binary installed - do you know if that comes pre-installed with OS X or is it something I compiled and added at some point?

Looks like it is in fink, could have come from there. Cheers

gatorparrots · 05-07-2003, 10:59 AM

It's not a part of the OS X 10.1 or 10.2 default installs. The likeliest source was fink:
fink list | grep whatmask

Code:

whatmask        1.1-1   Subnet calculator

Phil St. Romain · 05-07-2003, 02:35 PM

bluehz, I'm using a Macsense router with the following settings:

Private IP address: 192.168.1.1 (the router's address)
LAN subnet: 255.255.255.0

Public IP: 68.98.206.49
I've set port forwarding to use UDP and port 9 to direct to 192.168.1.255.

Using the link you shared with us, I input

Ethernet address: from my iMac
Public IP: 68.98.206.49
Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.255
Port: 9

The response page showed that a magic packet had been sent to the correct card number at the correct IP address. No wake. Any ideas?

bluehz · 05-07-2003, 04:46 PM

phil - your info looks good. Did you include the colons in your ethernet address or not - you should NOT include colons.

Other than that - I have no idea. I swear I sat here and did it approx 10 times on 2 diff machines... I am starting to think each router manufacture is different in terms of whether they will actually let you use the broadcast address or not. Interestingly enough - I just bought a new router I was going to install this afternoon anyway - so that will be a good test. I am going to go back and try it again with my current router (Linksys) then I am going to switch out the routers and try it again.

Which of the packet sniffing utilities would be good to watch for the packets coming into the LAN from outside? MOst of them spit out so much info - and with my untrained eye - I suspect it would fly right by me.

Phil St. Romain · 05-07-2003, 07:55 PM

bluehz, no colons on the ethernet address. Guess I'm just out of luck on this one. It would be nice, but, oh well . . .

05-06-2003, 02:25 PM	#22
Phil St. Romain Site Admin Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Wichita, KS Posts: 2,350	nope bluehz, no luck! I think I set up port forwarding on the router to only the LAN IP address of my iMac, which is a state address. I'll try referring to the whole subnet and see if that makes a difference. I'm just noticing in your directions that you emphasize this.

05-06-2003, 06:32 PM	#25
bluehz MVP Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,562	No - that is the correct broadcast address.... hmmm... wonder what thats about.... let me look into it.... hope its not a "feature of D-Link" routers since I just bought one. EDIT I am seeing a few reports of other not being able to set that address either, but its not necessarily brand related and no solution is listed. How are you trying to port forward? I think the proper way in your D-Link router is via Virtual Servers settings. Not sure how helpful this is... but I just discovered that D-Link has a really nice emulator on their site, I went in and messed around with it and it let me set the address to UDP/9 192.168.0.255.... but then again it is just an emulator. Nice feature of website. http://support.dlink.com/techtool/di...ator/login.htm Last edited by bluehz; 05-06-2003 at 06:58 PM.

05-06-2003, 07:07 PM	#27
mervTormel League Commissioner Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 5,536	hosts 0 and 255 are reserved. a broadcast address is 255.255.255.255 you don't want to forward anything to the broadcast address. the incoming packets should already have the broadcast address. i think __________________ On a clear disk, you can seek forever.

05-06-2003, 07:25 PM	#28
bluehz MVP Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,562	Merv - according to the wake-on-lan crowd you HAVE to send the signal to the broadcast address for your subnet... thats the only way it will work. http://www.dslreports.com/forum/wake...nlan~mode=shut Last edited by bluehz; 05-06-2003 at 07:37 PM.

05-06-2003, 07:37 PM	#29
djn1 MVP Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: UK Posts: 1,212	Did you notice that there were a couple of people in the first thread who reported that they couldn't set their routers to the broadcast address? __________________ chromasia G4/800, OS 10.3.x, 1.25GB RAM, 2x80GB HD, 60GB firewire, Geforce4MX, Iiyama VMpro 455+413 Goldtouch keyboard, Cirque EasyCat trackpad, D-Link DSL-604+

05-05-2003, 01:22 PM	#21
bluehz MVP Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,562	Cool - let us know how it works. I am still dumbfounded I actually got it to work. I swear I have tried probably 100 times at various site over the last 2-3 years and never once has it worked....

05-06-2003, 07:42 PM	#30
bluehz MVP Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,562	Yes - I noticed that BUT I never saw an explaination or solution... ain't forums great..... hahaha.. also - did a rather extensive search and could find no info regarding it being illegal to set address to 192.168.0.255. It looks like your settings are correct as far as I can tell from PDF. I doubt this has anything to do with it, and I know nothing about it - but what is the SSID stuff that has to do with wireless. It does some sort of broadcasting and I am wondering if it has reserved the *.255 for itself. I had no problems at all setting 192.168.0.255 on my old Linksys.

05-06-2003, 08:00 PM	#32
bluehz MVP Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,562	I have been reading that it is customary to reserve the 192.168.0.255 address for broadcast - this is a given. You technically should never use that address for anything... for example you would never want to assign that to a machine... so I am wondering if the router is imposing some error checking basically saying "nice try - but I'm not going to let you use that address". If so that would be a bummer - because you are NOT assigning that address to anything - you are just opening the pipe for that address to get through the router so it should have no effect. Is there a free tech support phone for your router?

05-07-2003, 08:41 AM	#35
bluehz MVP Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,562	stetner - do you think it may be that the router has idiotproofed the high/low addresses to prevent people from using them? Thats the only thing I can figure - I had no problem setting my router to 255 setting, but I read on the DSLreports forums about people trying to do the WOL and they too could not set address to 255. I am thinking the routers are confined to the useable addresses - just to keep people from getting in trouble. BTW - thx for the whatmask info - I was looking for something like that to mention in my instructions on using WOL. I'm going to submit the WOL tip to the main MacOSXHints - I hope you don't mind if I include the "whatmask" info also... I just noticed I already have the "whatmask" binary installed - do you know if that comes pre-installed with OS X or is it something I compiled and added at some point? Last edited by bluehz; 05-07-2003 at 08:45 AM.

05-07-2003, 10:59 AM	#37
gatorparrots Major Leaguer Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 441	whatmask It's not a part of the OS X 10.1 or 10.2 default installs. The likeliest source was fink: fink list \| grep whatmask Code: whatmask 1.1-1 Subnet calculator

05-07-2003, 02:35 PM	#38
Phil St. Romain Site Admin Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Wichita, KS Posts: 2,350	Re: whatmask bluehz, I'm using a Macsense router with the following settings: Private IP address: 192.168.1.1 (the router's address) LAN subnet: 255.255.255.0 Public IP: 68.98.206.49 I've set port forwarding to use UDP and port 9 to direct to 192.168.1.255. Using the link you shared with us, I input Ethernet address: from my iMac Public IP: 68.98.206.49 Subnet Mask: 255.255.255.255 Port: 9 The response page showed that a magic packet had been sent to the correct card number at the correct IP address. No wake. Any ideas?

05-07-2003, 04:46 PM	#39
bluehz MVP Join Date: Jan 2002 Posts: 1,562	phil - your info looks good. Did you include the colons in your ethernet address or not - you should NOT include colons. Other than that - I have no idea. I swear I sat here and did it approx 10 times on 2 diff machines... I am starting to think each router manufacture is different in terms of whether they will actually let you use the broadcast address or not. Interestingly enough - I just bought a new router I was going to install this afternoon anyway - so that will be a good test. I am going to go back and try it again with my current router (Linksys) then I am going to switch out the routers and try it again. Which of the packet sniffing utilities would be good to watch for the packets coming into the LAN from outside? MOst of them spit out so much info - and with my untrained eye - I suspect it would fly right by me.

05-07-2003, 07:55 PM	#40
Phil St. Romain Site Admin Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Wichita, KS Posts: 2,350	bluehz, no colons on the ethernet address. Guess I'm just out of luck on this one. It would be nice, but, oh well . . .