PDA

View Full Version : Wake on lan not working..



chili666
2007-11-14, 15:30
Hey there,

I got my squeezebox today and tried to set itp...
On thewhole it works fine - just WOL is not working. I ave a small server running WinXP and slimserver 6.5. The server goes to sleep (S3) after 10 minutes and I can wake it from any other machine on the nerwork...

Only the sqeezebox does not wake the server...

I donīt quite understand why - m I missing anything I have to confiure or any other advice?

Thanks

chili

peterw
2007-11-14, 15:36
What does your network look like? The Squeezebox will use the MAC it sees for the SlimServer host, so things like bridges and masquerading routers can mess up WOL.

Can you use packet-sniffing software on your network to examine traffic from the SB, to verify it's sending a WOL packet, and check see what MAC address it's trying to wake up?

vrobin
2007-11-14, 15:36
could your squeezebox be sending WOL packet to a router MAC address? (with nat of wireless machines) This is a common bug... otherwise, tcpdump (ethereal, wireshark, airsniff, etc.) is your best friend :).

Anoop M.
2007-11-14, 18:39
Just pointing out the obvious but I cannot tell weather you have covered this or not. WOL does not work if you are connected Wirelessly. Make sure you are hardwired.

Club1820
2007-11-14, 21:16
WOL does not work if you are connected Wirelessly. Make sure you are hardwired.

Well that answered my issue in a nutshell!

bernt
2007-11-15, 00:15
Just pointing out the obvious but I cannot tell weather you have covered this or not. WOL does not work if you are connected Wirelessly. Make sure you are hardwired.

Do you mean if the server is wireless?

I have a wireless connected SB3 and it wake up my (wonderful, the best, you just have to love it, thanks Michael) SlimNAS every time. :)

I tried WOL on XP but it just goes to sleep again after the SB had waked it.

chili666
2007-11-15, 00:31
Do you mean if the server is wireless?

I have a wireless connected SB3 and it wake up my (wonderful, the best, you just have to love it, thanks Michael) SlimNAS every time. :)

I tried WOL on XP but it just goes to sleep again after the SB had waked it.

My question exactly... My network is setup like this:

Squeezebox wireless to router
Router wireless to wifi-bridge
wifi-bridge wired via switch to server

So, the server itself does not have wifi...

I am using the same network for my HTPC and my Xbox360 as an extender and it works flawlessly...

It is not that XP is going back to sleep. It doesnīt even wake...

Iīll try packet-sniffing tonight...

Chili

vrobin
2007-11-15, 01:40
I don't know precisely about your setup, but the facts are:
- WOL works on wifi as long as the hardware you want to wake up is ethernet (very few wifi hardware support receiving WOL)
- WOL from SB can fail there is some sort of router/gateway between your SB and the device you're trying to wake (but not always)

The problem is that the SB must send a WOL packet with the MAC Address of the device you want to wake up. Sometimes, with routers, the SB don't know the MAC Address of the device to wake up, but the MAC Address of the router.

http://bugs.slimdevices.com/show_bug.cgi?id=4664

It may be your problem...

Mark Lanctot
2007-11-15, 07:48
What does your network look like? The Squeezebox will use the MAC it sees for the SlimServer host, so things like bridges and masquerading routers can mess up WOL.


My network is setup like this:

Squeezebox wireless to router
Router wireless to wifi-bridge
wifi-bridge wired via switch to server

Probably the bridge.

Club1820
2007-11-15, 10:42
the facts are:
- WOL works on wifi as long as the hardware you want to wake up is ethernet (very few wifi hardware support receiving WOL)
- WOL from SB can fail there is some sort of router/gateway between your SB and the device you're trying to wake (but not always)

The problem is that the SB must send a WOL packet with the MAC Address of the device you want to wake up. Sometimes, with routers, the SB don't know the MAC Address of the device to wake up, but the MAC Address of the router.

My Setup:

Server on Vista Wired to Router
SB3 wireless to router

When I first set this up I tried to use WOL but it didnt work so I just gave up. How can I trouble shoot this (now that I have more time)? By using wireshark?

Also, does anyone know if connecting remotely to the server wakes up the pc? By using Remote Desktop from work.

Thanks!

chili666
2007-11-15, 10:52
Hmmm.... I also think it might be the bridge... It is a Netgear WGE101.

I tried wireshark and it gives me heaps of output ;-)

I filtered it for "ethernet", which leaves just:

9 0.644036 SlimDevi_12:42:6a Broadcast ARP Who has 192.168.178.42? Tell 192.168.178.43
9 0.644036 SlimDevi_12:42:6a Broadcast ARP Who has 192.168.178.42? Tell 192.168.178.43

And several more entries just like those two... I canīt even see if the squeezebox is sending a magic paket or not..

Could anybody tell me what I am supposed to be looking for?

Thanks.

Chili

vrobin
2007-11-15, 11:05
You should look for a WOL packet, it's one (or a bunch?) of single UDP packets, usually on port 9 ("echo" in AFAIK but it can be any port even if some devices only work with a given port number) containing in the data zone repeated at least 8 times the MAC Address of the network card of the device to wake up.

If you don't see anything on your wired network you should check some wifi scanner... or more easily, plug your SB in the wired network in ethernet and see if it works (I'm nearly sure it will).

MajorD
2007-11-15, 11:27
Is there a way to view the MAC address of the SlimServer through the SB3?

Club1820
2007-11-15, 12:11
You should look for a WOL packet, it's one (or a bunch?) of single UDP packets, usually on port 9 ("echo" in AFAIK but it can be any port even if some devices only work with a given port number) containing in the data zone repeated at least 8 times the MAC Address of the network card of the device to wake up.

If you don't see anything on your wired network you should check some wifi scanner... or more easily, plug your SB in the wired network in ethernet and see if it works (I'm nearly sure it will).

Ok. So I installed wireshark and filtered only on the UDP protocol for the IP address that my wireless SB3 is on. NOTHING. no activity.

When all protocols are enabled there is a bunch of activity. All of it being TCP protocol.

Did I do this right? Does this mean that the SB3 is not sending the necessary info to the server/or its not getting there to wake-on-lan?

Thanks!

vrobin
2007-11-15, 12:21
Do you spy wired of wireless network?

If your problem is the mac address problem, the wol packet will stop at the router/gateway and never be passed to the lan.

To be sure, try at first to make wol work with ethernet and deal with wifi problems in a second time when wired wol is working.

Here's a tool that can be useful:
http://www.depicus.com/wake-on-lan/wake-on-lan-monitor.aspx

The whole site:
http://www.depicus.com/wake-on-lan/

Is a golden mine for wol tools and information.

Club1820
2007-11-15, 12:41
Do you spy wired of wireless network?

Not sure what you meant by this. ?

I will try the websites you suggested for more info. and also wire the SB3 and then try WOL.

Thanks.

vrobin
2007-11-15, 12:45
Not sure what you meant by this. ?


Do you capture packet from the ethernet network or the wifi network? (don't know how wireshark deals with wireless cards).

Club1820
2007-11-15, 13:49
Do you capture packet from the ethernet network or the wifi network? (don't know how wireshark deals with wireless cards).

If I am understanding you correctly - its capturing from ethernet card. The server is on PC that is wired. The SB3 is wireless. Wireshark is installed on the wired, server PC.

Does that sound right? Sorry, this is all new to me.
Thanks.

chili666
2007-11-15, 14:53
Thanks for the link to WOL-Monitor.

I just tried it from a machine behind the bridge. Nothing is coming through. All my boxes behind the bridge are shown with only one mac-address in the stats of my router...

I have another bridge (Netgear WG602) lying around. Does anybody know if this makes a difference? Or are there any other chances, other than running cables, left?

Chili

vrobin
2007-11-15, 16:05
If I am understanding you correctly - its capturing from ethernet card. The server is on PC that is wired. The SB3 is wireless. Wireshark is installed on the wired, server PC.

Does that sound right? Sorry, this is all new to me.
Thanks.


Yes, capturing on the ethernet card... WOL packet addressed to the router MAC can possibly not be passed to the ethernet network, so I would't be surprised not to see it.

vrobin
2007-11-15, 16:08
Thanks for the link to WOL-Monitor.

I just tried it from a machine behind the bridge. Nothing is coming through. All my boxes behind the bridge are shown with only one mac-address in the stats of my router...

I have another bridge (Netgear WG602) lying around. Does anybody know if this makes a difference? Or are there any other chances, other than running cables, left?

Chili

Don't look any further :). Try the wol monitor and wol wakeup from SB connected in ethernet to check your setup and if it doesn't work when you go wireless, it's 90% chance you're meeting the WOL MAC Address bug (in this case, vote for the bug in the bugzilla).

There's a little chance it's the bridge that doesn't forward broadcast packets but I wouldn't bet on this horse :)

chili666
2007-11-16, 00:37
Don't look any further :). Try the wol monitor and wol wakeup from SB connected in ethernet to check your setup and if it doesn't work when you go wireless, it's 90% chance you're meeting the WOL MAC Address bug (in this case, vote for the bug in the bugzilla).

There's a little chance it's the bridge that doesn't forward broadcast packets but I wouldn't bet on this horse :)

This is bad.

So I bought a wireless squeezebox to remove my noisy pc and its cables from the living room - just to get the cables back... and shelling out another € 100 for a powerline adapter.

Or I have to run upstairs to turn on the music...

Good bye WAF - it was nice knowing you :-(

*sigh*

Chili
P.S. Yeah, I am gonna vote for the bug.. but its been known for quite some time, hasnīt it?

vrobin
2007-11-16, 01:56
Plug you SB on the ethernet just to verify this is really your problem... and if it's really that problem, it's not totally SB fault.

There's a whole range of problem with WOL. Wake up device from the internet with some routers, etc...

There's always solution, like not using WOL. In the beginning, I planned to use WOL, but as I'm using a green low power PC, I find it more handy not to send the server to sleep...

And one day this may be fixed :).

chili666
2007-11-16, 02:31
Plug you SB on the ethernet just to verify this is really your problem... and if it's really that problem, it's not totally SB fault.

There's a whole range of problem with WOL. Wake up device from the internet with some routers, etc...

There's always solution, like not using WOL. In the beginning, I planned to use WOL, but as I'm using a green low power PC, I find it more handy not to send the server to sleep...

And one day this may be fixed :).

Yeah I know it is not totally SBīs fault. WOL is a nice idea, but does not work that faultless...

Green low power pc... hmmm that might be something... Or a NAS...

Ok, so if I have to spend even more money, then why not do it in style and get a decent NAS or something and leave that running 24/7...

;-)

Chili

vrobin
2007-11-16, 03:02
That's a matter of personal choice. After spending hours (not saying days) of comparing nas solutions, nas capabilities... I decided to buy a via epia:
- more evolutive
- more performant
- more versatile
- less closed
- much more simple to compile or add non standard stuff (such as squeezecenter beta, media file transcoder), no need for cross compiling and such problems
- less expansive, etc.

But NAS is more simple to setup (if you stick to official and ready to use installs -bye bye beta and early patches), more easy to integrate, with a better interface and they tends to get more and more performant.

If I add to choose again, I would stick to my via epia, I don't regret it at all! The only drawback I found is the initial setup costing a significative amount of time if you want to tweak your system with care (configure SMART HD alerts, power saving, etc.).

Hope it helps.
Robin

chili666
2007-11-16, 08:22
This is getting weirder and weirder...

I hooked the squeezebox onto my poweline lan. Everything except wol is working fine..

The Wol-Monitor does not see any magic packets being sent around... Wireshark does show me UDP-Packets coming form my squeezebox, but they donīt seem to wake the server.

Is there something wrong with the squeezebox? Or is it simply a user problem?

Chili

vrobin
2007-11-16, 08:24
you should try the WOL generator available at the same address I gave you.

If you're not able to wake it up manually, the problem is first with your computer: you must activate WOL in the bios and in the windows driver. And you must have another computer/tool to send magic packet to your asleep server.

chili666
2007-11-16, 08:36
WOL from anywhere in the network (wifi, wired to switch directly, wired to the switch via powerline) works fine. As long as i use the correct MAC the server wakes up.

But if I try on the squeezebox WOl-Monitor stays empty...

But at least the server wakes up... so I might just hook it up to my powerline... that might be easiest...

Chili
BTW Man, you are quick! thanks for your help!