If your connection is NAT'ed, is it possible to see your external IP address without making an outbound web request?

Any OS (Windows, Linux, etc.) is fine.

  • 7
    Are you only trying to avoid HTTP, or are you trying to avoid sending any outgoing traffic at all? The only universal solutions involve sending some kind of outgoing traffic, but it doesn't have to be HTTP.
    – Spiff
    Nov 1, 2018 at 18:57
  • This was more of just a hypothetical, I didn't want to make any outbound traffic at all. Nov 1, 2018 at 19:00
  • 2
    Are you saying that your network/router is behind a Enterprise grade NAT setup (ie. it is getting a private IP address from your ISP)? If so, there is no way I have think of that you can find the public IP address without something reaching out to the public network and essentially "looking back" like whatsmyip.com or similar services.
    – acejavelin
    Nov 1, 2018 at 19:14
  • the hack I used to do was to check with my router - I actually had a really dirty script to scrape that since for some reason most web based services would not detect my IP correctly. My ISP's really fun that way.
    – Journeyman Geek
    Nov 2, 2018 at 7:33
  • 2
    You can trying phoning your ISP with your customer details. Requires no internet connection and no computer.
    – Thomas
    Nov 3, 2018 at 6:02

6 Answers 6


If your computer is behind NAT, it is possible for you to see the external IP address of your router, but you need administrative access to the router.

The router knows your external IP address, so by accessing its configuration page you can find that IP address. This way does not require any specialized tool except a Web browser.

Other protocols which require a tool for getting the information:

As tested by user @dirkt, all methods only work with IPv4 (except possibly for PCP).

  • 2
    "Any other way will require making an external Web request" Web (i.e. HTTP) is not required, but easiest perhaps to grasp
    – eques
    Nov 2, 2018 at 18:23
  • 1
    As mentioned in the other answer, uPnP, NAT-PMP and PCP are different ways to get the information from the router besides accessing its configuration page. The way you phrased it, it looks like "besides accessing the configuration page, any other way will require making a web request". Correct is "besides getting the information from the router, any other way will require and outbound connection attempt" (it needn't be a web request).
    – dirkt
    Nov 3, 2018 at 8:28
  • @dirkt: For UPnP I'm not convinced; NAT-PMP I think only works with IPv4; PCP on IPv6 network will return the IPv6 prefix and can do much more but this is not usually implemented on commercial routers.
    – harrymc
    Nov 3, 2018 at 9:45
  • @eques: The Web is after two decades so much more than just HTTP ...
    – harrymc
    Nov 3, 2018 at 9:46
  • 1
    @harrymc: The UPnP service endpoint for my Fritzbox is WANIPConn1/GetExternalIPAddress, and it just successfully returned the correct address.
    – dirkt
    Nov 3, 2018 at 9:49

There are a few ways that work with some NATs but nothing that's guaranteed to work everywhere.

I believe uPnP, NAT-PMP, and PCP (Universal Plug And Play, NAT Port Mapping Protocol, and the Port Control Protocol) all have ways to ask a compliant NAT gateway what the public address is, but not all NATs support these protocols. Support is more common in home gateway routers than in corporate or carrier-grade NAT solutions.

When you find yourself behind a NAT, the only sure way to see what public IP address it is translating your traffic into is to send some outgoing traffic to some public host that will report back, in a way the NAT won't translate, what address your traffic appeared to come from. Using a web based service is one way, but you could also do it by, say, SSHing into a cloud server instance and seeing where sshd says your SSH session is coming from.

  • 8
    Also UPnP etc. could give a false result if the system was behind double (or more) NAT.
    – user71659
    Nov 1, 2018 at 22:52
  • @user71659 I have been wondering if there exist an anycast address which will automatically be routed to the outermost NAT such that it can be used for that kind of request.
    – kasperd
    Nov 1, 2018 at 23:43
  • 1
    @kasperd Every NAT thinks it's the outermost NAT. There are certainly IPs that are automatically routed outside of all NATs. Those are called public IPs.
    – user253751
    Nov 2, 2018 at 3:40
  • 1
    @user20574 No, NATs don't think that way, most just don't care. If such an anycast address was to be defined the standard would need to also define when a NAT assigns that IP to itself and when not. The answer to that is if the external IP is in RFC 1918 or RFC 6598 the NAT will not assign the anycast address to itself.
    – kasperd
    Nov 2, 2018 at 8:09

You can use a DNS request, which I believe would not fall under the category of "web request":

nslookup myip.opendns.com resolver1.opendns.com
  • 1
    You can also use dig +short @ o-o.myaddr.l.google.com txt | grep edns. I found the command here: groups.google.com/d/msg/public-dns-discuss/uyzmMcHQBE0/…
    – kasperd
    Nov 2, 2018 at 8:31
  • Your nsslookup command fails for me. I get Server: resolver1.opendns.com Address: 2620:119:35::35#53 ** server can't find myip.opendns.com: NXDOMAIN
    – kasperd
    Nov 2, 2018 at 8:36
  • 1
    @kasperd: It only works for IPv4, sorry. I avoided dig since it's not on Windows. Good point regarding myaddr for Google though, I wasn't aware of that! I guess the Windows nslookup equivalent would be nslookup -type=txt o-o.myaddr.l.google.com ns3.google.com
    – user541686
    Nov 2, 2018 at 9:12
  • I ran that command on a machine which has both IPv4 and IPv6, so if really did support IPv4 it should have worked. The problem is apparently you cannot instruct nslookup on which IP version to use for transport, but the way OpenDNS does this means you have to. Without that you'd have to predict which IP version nslookup will use for transport and ask for A or AAAA accordingly. If you are stuck with nslookup you can use another provider such as Google. However you still get only one protocol version in the response and you cannot choose which.
    – kasperd
    Nov 2, 2018 at 9:21
  • I tested nslookup -type=txt o-o.myaddr.l.google.com ns3.google.com and that does indeed work. But if I have both IPv4 and IPv6 that won't let me choose which of them I get to see. Most likely it will show me the IPv6 address, and most likely I am using it because I want to know the IPv4 address of a NAT. To get around that one would need to use a service which has an IPv4-only name and an IPv6-only name, that would also address the issue of NAT64.
    – kasperd
    Nov 2, 2018 at 9:24

I would like to add one point to already existing answers.

It also depends on the network complexity. It is possible that your computer is located within a network that has multiple external IP addresses and the router somewhere up the line sends the traffic out to the Internet based on some criteria: for example, destination IP-address, or time of day (may be one uplink channel is cheaper at night or for other reasons).

So, to be complete, a notion of "external IP address" may require defining a destination point to which your address is being external.

In the example below Router #2 could perform NAT and send traffic to either uplinks and the receiving host could see different external IP-address for the Host.

Or it could be that a certain destination (for example host1.example.com) always routes thru the Uplink A, and the host host2.example.com always routes via Uplink B. So, your external IP addresses as seen by those hosts will be different, providing that Uplink A and Uplink B are different ISPs.

   Uplink A                                  Uplink B
-------------                             -------------
      |                                         |
      |                                         |
      |   |
      |               -----------               |
      |---------------|Router #2|---------------|
                      |Router #1|
                      |   Host  |

So, sending traffic out will allow to get more reliable results.


You can use DNS rather than HTTP. For example you can use:

dig +short TXT o-o.myaddr.l.google.com

This will show the unicast address of the DNS server you are using, and if it supports EDNS it will also show your IP address, though possibly truncated.

To get your full IP address you can bypass your local DNS server and send above request directly to ns{1,2,3,4}.google.com

dig +short TXT o-o.myaddr.l.google.com @ns3.google.com

If you want to see your IP address in a specific protocol version you can use -6 and -4:

dig -6 +short TXT o-o.myaddr.l.google.com @ns3.google.com
dig -4 +short TXT o-o.myaddr.l.google.com @ns3.google.com

You can also use OpenDNS if you so prefer. OpenDNS doesn't use TXT records for this but rather A and AAAA records, so you have to specify which protocol version you are looking for:

dig -6 +short AAAA myip.opendns.com @resolver2.opendns.com
dig -4 +short A myip.opendns.com @resolver2.opendns.com

Notice that if your traffic goes through protocol translation you may get different results or none at all. Testing from a machine behind NAT64 I was able to see my IPv6 address with the above commands but not the IPv4 address of the NAT64.

This answer is based on these sources 1 2 3 and a bit research of my own.


Web generally refers to HTTP, if that is the meaning of your question, then for instance, you could use STUN ( Wikipedia Article ) which stands for "Session Traversal Utilities for NAT".

Now as it's been highlighted in a comment, you may have multiple external IPs. Also as wireless connections are becoming more common (thing 4G), it is not impossible that the IP address reported by your router would not be a public one. I've even met that scenario on optic fiber connections in some countries, where the ISP would give the local router a private IP, that would get 1:1 translated to a public IP later when leaving their network.

So if your question is "can I find my public IP without sending packets out of my network", you MIGHT in your context, but there's no 100% proof solution.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.