Re: Weird SCAN Issue

From: Frits Hoogland <>
Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 08:59:15 +0100
Message-Id: <>

Everyone guessed, why not actually look? Can you issue a 'lsnrctl services' for the local listener (which should listen on the VIP, and is called 'LISTENER' by default), and a 'lsnrctl services' for the SCAN listeners?

If you connect through a SCAN listener, you pick out a handler of a service, and if the handler is a remote server, you a redirected to that. The SCAN listener should list their all handlers of the services as REMOTE SERVER, and has a description of that remote services.

My *guess* would be the host description of the remote server handler in the SCAN listener is not resolvable/connectable for your client. But please do actual look.

Frits Hoogland
+31 6 53569942

On Nov 2, 2012, at 7:22 AM, Steven Andrew <> wrote:

> Thanks all for the responses. I will try to answer all the questions which
> we had ruled out as part of our troubleshooting excercise if you will :)
> We did telnet to SCAN IPs all 3, it worked. As it worked from appNode2, it
> was sure the SCAN IPs/port were open also services were registered in
> appropirate scan listeners.
> We validated the routes and they looked to be same on both app nodes. DNS
> and /etc/hosts on the app nodes, all looked normal and nslookup returned
> the right SCAN Ips, as it should.
> We have a firewall between appNodes and DB. Since i was able to
> successfully connect via the dbnode-vips from appNode1, that seem to have
> ruled out the FW. Also when i make the connection request via SCAN or SCAN
> ips, i see entry in respective SCAN listener log but don't see
> corresponding entry in dbnode-vip listener. That's where i'm at a loss.
> Andy, Both App nodes runs on stock version of client but no PSU
> applied on it. however the RAC nodes are on (Oct PSU). I will
> try to look up the bug you mentioned and try to do the workaround you had
> mentioned to see if i get lucky on that.
> Will keep you all posted.
> Steven.
> --

Received on Fri Nov 02 2012 - 08:59:15 CET

Original text of this message