Gigabit switch supporting WOL

Looking for a cheap (less than $35.00) switch from Asus, D-LINK, TP-
LINK etc. that doesn't interfere with wake on LAN. Four or five ports
is sufficient. Any recommendations?

I gather these new cheap switches feature green ethernet technology
that may prevent WOL from working. Here's a quote from a Newegg D-LINK
review:

"If your computer becomes idle it automatically deactivates the link
from the switch and if you use your Wake on LAN function it will not
be able to reach your computer."

Looks like some products these days may be getting too smart for their
own good.

Per :
> that doesn't interfere with wake on LAN

Could somebody dumb that down for me?

I've been pursuing WOL for awhile now and just the other day
somebody said something like "Why worry about a router that
broadcasts magic packets: just connect the devices to the same
switch and it will work."

Needless-to-say, it did not work - and it's sounding to me the
magic packet do-or-don't-do thing extends to switches.

?

(FWIW: NetGear GS108 gigabit switch).

--
PeteCresswell

On Jan 8, 9:55*am, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
>Could somebody dumb that down for me?

Been using WOL for over 13 years. Asus and other MB makers, NIC
makers, Windows etc. have been supporting it just fine. The last thing
one would expect to get in the way is a hub (obsolete) or switch. I'm
speculating here but based on that review, it seems that these cheap
switches nowadays, all boasting green ethernet technology, are using
the same or similar ethernet chips that shutdown the port (until the
NIC wakes) when they detect that the NIC is in a standby state
(that'll probably save you a whopping fifty cents a year). Hoping that
this isn't the case and I'm just making a mountain out of a molehill.

> (FWIW: NetGear GS108 gigabit switch).

I've had a GS108T for the last four years and know that older switches
work just fine with WOL. However, I need at least three more switches
to finish upgrading this place to gigabit ethernet. Please, don't even
mention 802.11n WLAN, been there done that.

Per :
>> (FWIW: NetGear GS108 gigabit switch).
>
>I've had a GS108T for the last four years and know that older switches
>work just fine with WOL.

Can you comment on the prospect of getting WOL to work without a
WOL-broadcast-enabled router by connecting the sender of the
magic packet and the device tb awakened to the same GS108 switch?

Or is maybe the "T" suffix critical?
--
PeteCresswell

On Jan 8, 1:28*pm, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
> Can you comment on the prospect of getting WOL to work without a
> WOL-broadcast-enabled router by connecting the sender of the
> magic packet and the device tb awakened to the same GS108 switch?

All you need is the MAC address of the sleeping computer and run a
program on the waking computer using that address. You can download
such a program here if you're using Windows;

http://www.gammadyne.com/cmdline.htm#wol

Provided both computers are connected to the switch then the router
and its features are irrelevant. Normally, the switch and its features
would be irrelevant too, hence my concern with these new cheap routers
boasting green ethernet technology.

On Jan 8, 2:56*pm, "op...@hotmail.com" <op...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> hence my concern with these new cheap routers
> boasting green ethernet technology.

Should have been cheap switches instead of cheap routers.

In message
<97d4acae-d056-450d-8649->
"" <> was claimed to have wrote:

>On Jan 8, 9:55*am, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote:
>>Could somebody dumb that down for me?
>
>Been using WOL for over 13 years. Asus and other MB makers, NIC
>makers, Windows etc. have been supporting it just fine. The last thing
>one would expect to get in the way is a hub (obsolete) or switch. I'm
>speculating here but based on that review, it seems that these cheap
>switches nowadays, all boasting green ethernet technology, are using
>the same or similar ethernet chips that shutdown the port (until the
>NIC wakes) when they detect that the NIC is in a standby state
>(that'll probably save you a whopping fifty cents a year). Hoping that
>this isn't the case and I'm just making a mountain out of a molehill.

For WoL to work the NIC can't go into standby state, it needs to
maintain a link (although often a 10Mb/s half-duplex link instead of
it's full speed) so switches shouldn't be turning their port off either.

On Jan 8, 7:59*pm, DevilsPGD <Still-Just-A-Rat-In-A-C...@crazyhat.net>
wrote:
> In message
>
> For WoL to work the NIC can't go into standby state

That's like saying that the power supply cannot go into a standby
state because its standby voltage caters to memory and other devices
like the NIC when the computer is in a S3 standby state.

> it needs to
> maintain a link (although often a 10Mb/s half-duplex link instead of
> it's full speed) so switches shouldn't be turning their port off either.

Agreed. The reviewer in my OP is quoting a D-LINK support person who
told him that the switch in question does not support WOL. I need that
clarified before purchasing one of these switches since it's not clear
as to what exactly green ethernet implies. I've also written to the
manufacturer.

In message
<dd5d7772-53a7-4e08-bcf2->
"" <> was claimed to have wrote:

>On Jan 8, 7:59*pm, DevilsPGD <Still-Just-A-Rat-In-A-C...@crazyhat.net>
>wrote:
>> In message
>>
>> For WoL to work the NIC can't go into standby state
>
>That's like saying that the power supply cannot go into a standby
>state because its standby voltage caters to memory and other devices
>like the NIC when the computer is in a S3 standby state.

I'm consider these to be quite different examples of powering down.

Power supplies mostly power down though, leaving only one voltage on one
rail online, and cannot supply sufficient power to run the system when
the power supply is in a standby state.

WoL NICs stay online and linked to the network in a state that, in many
environments, is fully functional.

On Jan 8, 9:42*pm, DevilsPGD <Still-Just-A-Rat-In-A-C...@crazyhat.net>
wrote:
>
> WoL NICs stay online and linked to the network in a state that, in many
> environments, is fully functional.

Googled this ("wake on lan" "green technology")..."I wish I could find
an inexpensive gigabit switch that doesn't have this stupid "green
technology" that shuts off ports that aren't in-use and breaks Wake-on-
LAN.". It's the functionality of the switch, not the NIC, that I'm
worried about.