Page 1 of 1

Wake on LAN

Posted: 29 Nov 2014, 08:46
by madsub
Hi,

my home server with madsonic is based on a PC and I have him configured to go to standby after some time with no access and wake up by a received magic packet from the cilent.
Using madsonic client I have to first send a magic packet with a seperate app and then start Madsonic.

It would be a much more comfortable an a perfect feature for the client to have an option "Send a magic packet".
This option has to be flexible for:
MAC-Adress
URL or IP
UDP-Port
Subnet
Waiting time for the server to wake up (and then start the music player)

There are a lot of explanations code-examples to be found in the web. e.g:
http://www.depicus.com/wake-on-lan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake-on-LAN
http://www.jibble.org/wake-on-lan/
http://shadesfgray.wordpress.com/2010/1 ... -tutorial/

Re: Wake on LAN

Posted: 01 Dec 2014, 01:15
by DoCC
makes only sense if you are connected internally. wifi <-> LAN
i guess there are many 3rd party apps doing WOL , if you need this.

if you are connected via mobile or a friends wifi , no chance

if i would implement such a snipplet into my peace of code, i would set up a loop-function. the app will only fire up if WOL has succeded.
so i bet this request is not one of the best ??

Re: Wake on LAN

Posted: 03 Dec 2014, 11:24
by madsub
DoCC wrote:if you are connected via mobile or a friends wifi , no chance
Why not?
I do it all the time on journeys and at friends home:
First wake up my server with an extra app and then start Madsonic.
The only difference to my request is, that I have to do it manually in two steps.

On desktops and notebooks I created a batch file that first starts a WOL-program and then the browser with the link of my server.
With my tablet I have to do it in two steps and it would be more comfortable with Madsonic having a configurable waking feature, especially when I want to tell firends how to reach my server.
if i would implement such a snipplet into my peace of code, i would set up a loop-function. the app will only fire up if WOL has succeded.
That is a good idea.
so i bet this request is not one of the best ??
I think it is a good request, because I and maybe others need it. The reason you can take a workaround with manually starting 2 apps after another cannot be seriously called a reason to reject such a feature.