Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Conclusion
There is nothing wrong with a VIP address of 10.X.X.X or other so called nonroutable
address as long as your RAC cluster is isolated from The Internet. CLUVFY
is too strict in it's VIP address checks. In other words – CLUFVY complains too
loudly.
Why does CVU complain "WARNING: Could not find a suitable set of interfaces for
VIPs"?
CVU checks for the following criteria before considering a set of interfaces for VIP:
-- the interfaces should have the same name across nodes
-- they should belong to the same subnet
-- they should have the same netmask
-- they should be on public(and routable) network.
Oftentimes, the interfaces planned for the VIPs are configured on 10.*, 172.16.* - 172.31.* or
192.168.* networks, which are not routable. Hence CVU does not consider them as suitable for
VIPs. If none of the available interfaces satisfy this criteria, CVU complains "WARNING: Could
not find a suitable set of interfaces for VIPs.". It is worth noting that, such addresses will actually
work if they're public, but CVU just thinks they're private and reports accordingly.