# Any success with Wake On Lan over the internet? [solved]

## Unclethommy

Hi there, to compliment the cool things that linux can do I thought I'd get Wake On Lan a try. Unfortunately, after following the steps from one of the main HOWTO in this forum, my computer's net connection started to play and and become unstable with the connection to the internet knocking out my DSL modem (i have a motorola surfboard supplied by telewest UK). Disappointed and a lil confused, i've resorted to turning the WOL option off for the moment. I checked with both my motherboard and my PCI network card whether they support WOL, which they both do. I cant find a cable slot for the card to provide power while the machine is switched off. Hence, i am guessing that my card falls into the category where its new enough to get its power from the PCI bus (i've read this somewhere but cant find the link). I was only able to get the line up again after calling up technical services and getting them to reset the router. I must note here that they said they were conducting repairs in the area the next day and i dont know if the modem drop out was purely cooincidental. Before I sum up the bravery to try WOL again I want to ask if the intermitent hanging of the net connection would indeed cause the symptoms which I described. Secondly, I wanted to know (before i go to all that effort) whether anyone has successully turned their computer (behind a router, mine's a Linksys BEFSR81) on remotely over the internet. Theres a site which claims to be able to send the magic packets to the computer but i dont know how save submitting the explicit details of my net connection is. here's the site:

http://www.depicus.com/wake-on-lan/woli.aspxLast edited by Unclethommy on Mon Nov 27, 2006 9:21 pm; edited 1 time in total

----------

## feld

yeah. SSH to a server on that LAN and then run WOL from there. works fine that way  :Smile: 

----------

## Unclethommy

Is there any way to wake the computer remotely so that others computers dont need to be on i.e. send the packet to the router and through a forwarded port which the sleeping computer recognises and then powers on?

----------

## ZmiyGorinich

I think this must work. I try it and say does is working

----------

## Unclethommy

I've mustered the strength to try wake on lan. The connection is fine for the moment but mr postman seems to be complaining now for some reason that it cant fetch my gmail and hotmail accounts. On trying to wake my computer from my sisters computer on the same LAN network (she has windows) using the windows WOL GUI program on the Depicus website, the computer didnt start (disappointingly). Does anyone have any ideas? I'm sure i've copied the MAC address correctly. Also, I noticed that the wake on internet option on the site sends the signal to the wrong IP address..... 

Any ideas?

----------

## abalint21

 *Unclethommy wrote:*   

> I've mustered the strength to try wake on lan. The connection is fine for the moment but mr postman seems to be complaining now for some reason that it cant fetch my gmail and hotmail accounts. On trying to wake my computer from my sisters computer on the same LAN network (she has windows) using the windows WOL GUI program on the Depicus website, the computer didnt start (disappointingly). Does anyone have any ideas? I'm sure i've copied the MAC address correctly. Also, I noticed that the wake on internet option on the site sends the signal to the wrong IP address..... 
> 
> Any ideas?

 

Hello! I would want to do the same thing... to wake up my PC from the internet trough a router, by sending the magick packet to the LAN's broadcast address, but so far didn't manage to do this. I have to gentoo boxes, and if one is up, I can wake up my other PC. So far I couldn't find a program on linux like the one of Depicus is providing.

I hope I'll have more time in the near future, and I'll conduct some experiments... I'll let you know what I come up with!  :Wink: 

Until then... only the best,

   X

----------

## Unclethommy

Thanks for the help. Hope we can find a solution cos I think it would be really cool.

----------

## Judge584

Hi,

I'm using WOL over internet, and it is working like a charm.

I'm using the tool on www.depicus.com to wake up my Gentoo at home from work: http://www.depicus.com/wake-on-lan/woli.aspx

My gentoo is behind an adsl modem/router, so this is not a problem.

How to get WOL working:

Just follow this wiki: http://gentoo-wiki.com/Wake_on_lan

And If you're behine a router like me, don't forget to set a port forwarding rule on port 7.(port 7 is the default port for WOL)

Feel free to ask details if needed.

WOL problems are often due to bad bios configuration or bad ethernet driver configuration.

----------

## abalint21

 *Quote:*   

> I'm using WOL over internet, and it is working like a charm. 

 

That's sounds promising  :Smile: 

 *Quote:*   

> My gentoo is behind an adsl modem/router, so this is not a problem.
> 
> How to get WOL working:
> 
> Just follow this wiki: http://gentoo-wiki.com/Wake_on_lan
> ...

 

I've done this already and the WoL is working from within the network...

 *Quote:*   

> And If you're behine a router like me, don't forget to set a port forwarding rule on port 7.(port 7 is the default port for WOL) 

 

The queston is with my rooter configuration. I'm new to networking, and I admit that I've didn't read to much on this, but it's never to late is it ...  :Wink: 

My problem: The rooter supports Virtual Servers (NAT settings), and I've given him the following rule:

If a packet comes form the internet on the port 7 -> forward and UDP package on port 7 on the machine I have to wake up ... my case 192.168.1.2

I've tried to use to send a package to a noneexisting IP ... like 192.168.1.254 so that every machine get's the ethernet package, but still no reaction...  :Sad: 

Any suggestions? Should I use TCP insted of UDP, because I've reasoned that the protocol at the ethernet level it's not important so... I could as well use UDP (connectionless protocol)

```
My current rooter settings regarding WoL:

Destination     Proto.  Port Range  Redirect to

86.125.xxx.xxx UDP     7           192.168.1.254

86.125.xxx.xxx TCP     7           192.168.1.254
```

How should I modify this so that WoL can work?Last edited by abalint21 on Tue Nov 21, 2006 2:14 pm; edited 1 time in total

----------

## Judge584

 *Quote:*   

> The rooter supports Virtual Servers (NAT settings), and I've given him the following rule:
> 
> If a packet comes form the internet on the port 7 -> forward and UDP package on port 7 on the machine I have to wake up ... my case 192.168.1.2 

 

yes that's right (i have the same settings as you, same ip...): but i cannot help you on UDP vs TCP because my rooter open them both by default.(but i think it is udp)

Be sure to verify that your rooter firewall is disable for testing WOL.

For your rule do this:

Destination     Proto.  Port Range  Redirect to

86.125.xxx.xxx  UDP     7           192.168.1.2

86.125.xxx.xxx  TCP     7           192.168.1.2

what's your rooter? brand, model? -->i can have a look at the rooter manual to give you more acurate answer.

My router rule:

In port forwarding (not range forwarding)

external port 7-->TCP&UDP-->internal port 7 on 192.168.1.2

----------

## abalint21

My rooter is a Asus WL500gP

Here you can find my current: - port forwarding schema

http://abalint21.8k.ro/hpgentoo/virtualServerConfig.jpg

- firewall rules - which I think is set to accept everything now, because ther are no rules specified, and is set to accept any connections which are not specified in the list below (WAN to LAN Filter Table)

http://abalint21.8k.ro/hpgentoo/firewallSettings.jpg

Any suggestions, about why is the ports still closed?

Thank you in advance,

    X

Later edit:

I've tried to disable the firewall but the port 7 is not closed but still filtered. Is that a problem?

Nmap output:

```
PORT   STATE    SERVICE

7/tcp  filtered echo

8/tcp  closed   unknown

9/tcp  closed   discard

10/tcp closed   unknown

11/tcp closed   systat

12/tcp closed   unknown

13/tcp closed   daytime

14/tcp closed   unknown

15/tcp closed   netstat

16/tcp closed   unknown

17/tcp closed   qotd

18/tcp closed   msp

19/tcp closed   chargen

20/tcp filtered ftp-data

21/tcp filtered ftp

22/tcp filtered ssh
```

----------

## Judge584

Ok,

so WOL work for you on your local network.(i assume that you have tried this with linux tool like wakeonlan or etherwake on port 7)

Your firewall is not enable, and the port forwarding rule is ok.(according to your last post all is ok)

So it should work via internet! 

If it doesn't:

On www.depicus.com, be sure to enter your correct mac adress like this xx-xx-xx-xx-xx instead of xx:xx:xx:xx:xx

be sure to enter your public ip and your public subnet mask.

and if still no luck:  perhaps your provider is filtering wol magic packet? It seems that some are doing this...ask to be sure.

PS: don't bother on nmap: it seems that I don't know how to properly use it, because my port 7 is open and wol is working for me, but nmap report that my port 7 is closed!

----------

## abalint21

Hello Judge,

   I've done some testing in an came up with some questions to you!  :Smile: 

You've sad that you've configured your router to route your WoL packages to the PC you want to wake up, in your case 192.168.1.2. Right?

If no computer is up behind the router => ARP isn't working, how can the router know where to send the package? because I'm pretty shure that it wont broadcast the message if it can't find the IP address.

I've configured my router to send my packages which are arriving at port 7 to the desired machine. (192.168.1.2)

I've used the following command:

```
wakeonlan -i <publicIP> -p 7 <MAC addr>
```

The package arrives, it is accepted by the router:

```
Nov 22 20:29:41  filter: UDP connection accepted to 192.168.1.2:7 from 192.168.1.3:1035
```

but nothing happends. I suppose that to router send out the ARP package, and because the machine that I wan to wake up .. well it not up  :Smile:  nobody know his MAC address. Because of this the router considers that this package isn't ment to anyone and drops it.

I've tried to following:

I've turned on my other PC from the network

I've tried to send the WoL command to the local 192.168.1.2 but still nothing.

```
wakeonlan -i 192.168.1.2 -p 7 <MAC addr>
```

I've tried to send the packages to the local broadcast address - in my case 192.168.1.255 - and what do you know... the other PC get's the WoL package and everything works as it should

I've made my changes to the port forwarding settings in the router so any connection that comes to my publicIP:9 should be forwarded to the local broadcast address.

Now the sad thing: in my routers log the package that I send to port 9 doesn't even appear as dropped or accepted

My question is: WHY?

Could you/someone explain to my why the hack not?

Thank everyone...

    X

----------

## Judge584

 *Quote:*   

> Hello Judge,
> 
>    I've done some testing in an came up with some questions to you! 
> 
> You've sad that you've configured your router to route your WoL packages to the PC you want to wake up, in your case 192.168.1.2. Right?

 

Yes, you're right.

 *Quote:*   

> If no computer is up behind the router => ARP isn't working, how can the router know where to send the package? because I'm pretty shure that it wont broadcast the message if it can't find the IP address.

 

I must do some search on this, i don't now really...but the fact is that my port forwarding rule is set to forward my wan port 7 to the local ip 192.168.1.2:7, and that WOL is working!

 *Quote:*   

> Now the sad thing: in my routers log the package that I send to port 9 doesn't even appear as dropped or accepted
> 
> [/list]
> 
> My question is: WHY?
> ...

 

It's so strange, I think my router doesn't really work like yours, because my port forwarding rule work for me on 192.168.1.2:7, and from what you have said, i am pretty sure that it will work even if i change my rule to 192.168.1.255:7! (at least it make sense, and i will test it)

For information, mine is a Zyxel 660HW.

So I guess if we want to help others that it is better to tell to set the forward rule to xx.xx.xx.255 than the real ip, because it will be probably be more compatible with different type of routers.

If someone know why we have such difference on different routers, please help!

----------

## abalint21

 *Quote:*   

> 
> 
> So I guess if we want to help others that it is better to tell to set the forward rule to xx.xx.xx.255 than the real ip, because it will be probably be more compatible with different type of routers.
> 
> If someone know why we have such difference on different routers, please help!

 

I've convinced my friend to try to set up the port forwarding rule in his router but, that router doesn't even let him add the local network broadcast address (192.168.1.255), because for the router point of view it's a security hazzard.

Well, I'm still looking for and answer...

If I've found some normal explanation, I'll let you know  :Smile: 

And thanks again for the active support...

X

----------

## Judge584

In my Zyxel router, when i set NAT rule, all i have to do is to set the start port (7), the end port (7), and the server ip adress (192.168.1.2)

this evening i will test with 192.168.1.255 as server ip adress and see if it works.But i think it will.

My router is set to do NAT in SUA mode only instead of full mode: i don't really know what is the difference between SUA/FULL NAT.

----------

## Judge584

ok, so i have modified my NAT rule to forward wan port 7 to local lan port 7 on 192.168.1.255. (instead of 192.168.1.2)

then i have done a shutdown -h now

and finally i have send the magick packet from here: http://www.depicus.com/wake-on-lan/woli.aspx

and...it works like a charm!

So yes, I'm agree with abalint21 (thanks guy!), it is better to set the NAT rule on a local broadcoast ip than on the real ip.

sure it will be more compatible with different type of routers.

Judge584

----------

## Unclethommy

I am proud to say that my WOL is actually working with great deal of help from Judge584!!!! Very much appreciated!

I got my onboard NIC working after selecting the right modules in the kernel. As the oboard was now working I didnt have to worry about directing power to the NIC when it was off etc.

I forwarded port 7 to 192.168.1.255 as judge584 suggested rather than my computer's port of 192.168.1.100 

The only thing which I would document for others who are having problems using WOL over internet  is when using the depicus website , it seems to want to send signals to a different IP to the Ip i specify. eg i specify 12.34.56.789 but it sends it to 12.34.56.255 (see the red writing at the bottom of the page) and after judge584's suggestion i used the submask 255.255.255.255 even though mine was 255.255.248.0 which seemed to fix the problem and my computer can now start over the net. 

Hope this helps anyone who wants to try it and a big thank you again for judge584's constant help behind the scenes  :Smile: 

My network config :

Router = Linksys BEFSR81 

NIC = SiS900 onboard chipset

Modem = Motorola Surfboard cable modem

----------

