Cases4 cases

1 to 4 of 4

1. IL-0341 Traffic between Cloudflare and AWS us-east-1 had high latency, packet loss and origin failures for almost four hours

   Cloudflare2025

   Symptoms

   From 16:27 UTC on 21 August 2025, users connecting to Cloudflare from servers in AWS us-east-1, or receiving connections from Cloudflare there, saw high latency, packet loss and failures to reach origins. Cloudflare's network team was alerted to internal congestion in Ashburn (IAD) at 16:44 UTC.

   Packet lossHigh latencyIntermittent timeouts

   Trigger

   At about 16:27 UTC a single customer began sending many requests from AWS us-east-1 to Cloudflare for objects in Cloudflare's cache, doubling the total traffic from Cloudflare to AWS.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Transit gateway or network interconnectBGP routingCDN and edge network

   Contributing factor

   No headroomHarmful manual actionExcessive blast radius

   Detection

   Cloudflare's network team was alerted to internal congestion in Ashburn (IAD) at 16:44 UTC, and an incident was raised for customer impact at 17:45 UTC.

   Remediation

   • Rate limited the single customer whose traffic caused the surge
   • Took further traffic engineering actions that fully resolved the congestion
   • Asked AWS to revert its BGP prefix withdrawals, which AWS finished at 20:07 UTC

   Action items

   • Build a mechanism to deprioritise a customer's traffic when it congests the network enough to affect others
   • Speed up the Data Center Interconnect upgrades to add network capacity
   • Work with AWS so the two companies' BGP traffic engineering actions do not conflict
   • Build a traffic management system that gives each customer a network resource budget and automates the manual actions used here

   Lessons

   Cloudflare concludes that it must isolate customers better so that no single customer can take over shared network resources and degrade the platform for others, and that its network needs enough capacity to meet demand. It describes the outage as the result of insufficient network congestion management during an unusual high-traffic event.

   View case
2. IL-0347 About 25% of Scaleway FR-PAR-1 hypervisors lost VPC connectivity when both VPC BGP route reflectors got stuck

   Scaleway2024

   Symptoms

   On 18 October 2024, from 7:50 to 8:01 UTC, about 25% of the hypervisors in Scaleway's FR-PAR-1 availability zone lost VPC connectivity with the rest of the region, and products that use VPC failed with them. Public internet connectivity and Elastic Metal VPC connectivity were not affected.

   Network unreachablePacket lossNode NotReady

   Trigger

   At 6:20 UTC a Top of Rack switch in FR-PAR-1 had a software crash. One of the two BGP route reflectors for VPC ran on a hypervisor in that rack and was left in an abnormal state.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Network control plane (SDN)BGP routingNetwork switchDatabaseManaged Kubernetes control plane and provider API

   Contributing factor

   Excessive blast radiusAutomation amplification

   Detection

   Health-check monitoring on both route reflectors detected the anomaly, and the Scaleway Customer Excellence and SRE teams detected the customer impact and opened an incident.

   Remediation

   • Fixed both VPC route reflectors by manual action

   Action items

   • Fixed the autohealing mechanism that had failed to fix route reflectors stuck in a stale state; the fix is https://github.com/FRRouting/frr/pull/17163
   • Run different software versions on the route reflectors so a single bug cannot stop several instances
   • Investigate the software issue that left the route reflectors in a stale state

   View case
3. IL-0225 An IGP purge command made every Microsoft WAN router recompute routes, causing global latency, timeouts and packet loss

   Microsoft Azure2023

   Symptoms

   From 07:08 UTC on 25 January 2023, customers saw long network latency and timeouts when connecting to resources in Azure regions and to other Microsoft services such as Microsoft 365 and Power Platform. Microsoft's monitoring detected DNS and WAN issues from 07:11 UTC.

   High latencyIntermittent timeoutsIntermittent connection failuresPacket lossNetwork unreachable

   Trigger

   A network engineer adding capacity to the global WAN in Madrid ran a step of a recently changed standard operating procedure that purged the IGP database; on the router manufacturer involved, that command runs on all IGP-joined routers instead of only the local one.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Backbone network (WAN)Interior routing (IGP)BGP routing

   Contributing factor

   No configuration testsUnverified assumptionExcessive blast radiusHarmful manual action

   Detection

   Monitoring detected DNS and WAN issues from 07:11 UTC and alerted the on-call engineers within 5 minutes of the command being run. The team reviewed all recent changes and identified the command by 08:20 UTC. The engineer making the change was not informed of the alerts because of the unqualified changes to the SOP.

   Remediation

   • Restarted by hand the paused WAN health and traffic engineering systems, which ended the remaining packet loss

   Action items

   • Audit and block similar widespread-impact commands across all three vendors for all WAN router roles
   • Give on-call engineers real-time visibility of approved and unqualified activity on network devices
   • Run regular mandatory operational training and attestation of following all SOPs
   • Have the Change Advisory Board review all SOPs still pending qualification within 30 days

   View case
4. IL-0222 Google Cloud US regions had heavy packet loss and some went unreachable after the network control plane was descheduled

   Google Cloud2019

   Symptoms

   On Sunday 2 June 2019, with user impact beginning between 11:47 and 11:49 US/Pacific, Google Cloud projects in several US regions saw elevated packet loss from network congestion, and some regions became unreachable. Customers saw higher latency, intermittent errors and lost connectivity to instances in us-central1, us-east1, us-east4, us-west2, northamerica-northeast1 and southamerica-east1, while us-west1, Europe and Asia had no regional congestion.

   Packet lossNetwork unreachableHigh latencyHigh error rateMonitoring outage

   Trigger

   At 11:45 US/Pacific a relatively rare type of datacenter maintenance event started in one physical location, and the automation that runs it descheduled logical clusters that also held network control plane jobs in other physical locations.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Network control plane (SDN)BGP routingBackbone network (WAN)

   Contributing factor

   Excessive blast radiusCircular dependencyLimited debug accessIneffective rollback

   Detection

   Google engineers were alerted to the failure two minutes after it began and started the incident process used for the most serious production incidents. The first customer notice appeared on the status page at 12:53 US/Pacific.

   Remediation

   • Lowered the priority of less critical network traffic classes to reduce congestion
   • Halted the datacenter automation software responsible for the maintenance event
   • Rescheduled the network control plane and its supporting infrastructure in each location
   • Rebuilt and redistributed the lost network control plane configuration, rolling it out from 14:03
   • Directed service traffic away from the affected regions
   • Moved the Cloud VPN control plane in three regions out of its fail-safe state

   Action items

   • Keep the maintenance automation off until safeguards stop it descheduling jobs in several physical locations at once
   • Harden the cluster management software to reject such requests whatever their origin
   • Reconfigure the network control plane to reject maintenance requests of the type involved
   • Make the network control plane in each location persist its configuration
   • Let the network stay in fail static mode longer when the control plane is lost
   • Review, update and test emergency response tooling and procedures, including customer communication tooling, for such network failures
   • Extend continuous disaster recovery testing to this and similarly catastrophic failures

   View case

By root cause3