Cases6 cases

1 to 5 of 6

1. IL-0087 After a cold reboot of RKE2 nodes, pods could not get IP addresses because Multus could not reach the Kubernetes API, and further reboots spread the failure to every node

   Fyra Labs2023

   Symptoms

   At around 2 AM ICT on 2023-04-09 the team saw unusual CPU use on one cluster node, which throttled every other service on it and made them fail. They presumed an upstream container runtime bug in containerd and runc and decided to fully reboot the affected nodes, taking the cluster down for maintenance on the assumption that it was not in active use.

   Sustained high node CPUService outage

   Trigger

   A full cold reboot of the nodes that showed unusual CPU use, followed by upgrades and cold reboots of the other nodes.

   Root cause

   unknown

   Component

   Multus meta-CNICalicoContainer runtime

   Contributing factor

   Harmful manual actionUnverified assumption

   Detection

   The team saw unusual CPU use on a node around 2 AM ICT and failing services on the rebooted nodes around 2:30 ICT; developers reported the Terra repositories down at 6:31 ICT.

   Remediation

   • uninstalled Multus and Calico and replaced them with the Cilium CNI
   • rolled back most cluster settings except the CNI

   Lessons

   Rebooting nodes to clear one problem can expose another; here a CNI chain could not reach the API server after a cold start. Repeating the same reboot on more nodes while the first failure was not understood spread the outage from a few nodes to the whole cluster. The team also found that Cilium's real resource use in their cluster was acceptable, contrary to the benchmark they had relied on.

   View case
2. IL-0109 A retried node rollover on a DFDS EKS cluster set the Auto Scaling group back to 15 instances, and the default termination policy removed every healthy worker node, leaving the cluster with no nodes

   DFDS2023sev1

   Symptoms

   At 09:33 UTC on 14 February 2023 end users told the platform team that Kubernetes logs were not arriving in CloudWatch as expected. The investigation went through fluentd and found that the nodes were running containerd as their container runtime instead of docker-shim. A scheduled node rollover the day before, at 07:30 UTC on 13 February, had set containerd as the default runtime by accident.

   Service outageResources deletedMonitoring outage

   Trigger

   A scheduled node rollover had accidentally made containerd the default container runtime, which stopped log shipping to CloudWatch; the unscheduled rollover to revert it timed out, and the pipeline run that followed reduced the Auto Scaling group from 30 to 15 instances.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Container runtimeNode launch templateNode poolTerraformTelemetry agent

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationUnreviewed defaultsUnrepresentative stagingNo configuration testsNo runbookHarmful manual action

   Detection

   End users reported the missing CloudWatch logs that started the work. The postmortem lists 2 minutes as the time to detection of the node failure.

   Remediation

   • ran the node rollover script to add new nodes, which failed on a timeout from Docker Hub
   • ran the node rollover script a second time, which added new nodes that the load balancer marked healthy at 11:01 UTC

   Action items

   • Document the rollover process, especially what can be done when it goes wrong
   • Investigate options for improving the rollover process
   • Add fluentd log collection to the QA test suite so logs are covered end to end
   • Add alarms for fluentd when too little or no log data is sent
   • Implement a staging environment
   • Implement guards against selecting an invalid container runtime

   Lessons

   When a change goes wrong, rolling back to a known working configuration is safer than rushing a fix, which can make the damage worse. Launching new worker nodes depends on the cloud-init script not failing in any way. The QA configuration differed from production, there was no staging environment, the QA tests did not cover fluentd log collection, and the rollover process had no documentation for when it fails.

   View case
3. IL-0199 A non-essential container exceeding its memory limit made GitHub's production pods unavailable, and their restarts failed because a DNS maintenance change had left the clusters unable to reach the image registry

   GitHub2020

   Symptoms

   At 08:18 UTC on 13 July 2020, production Kubernetes pods began to be marked unavailable. The loss of pods spread through the clusters and reduced capacity until GitHub.com services went down.

   OOMKilledImage pull failuresService outage

   Trigger

   A container in the production pods exceeded its memory limit and was terminated; a routine DNS maintenance operation completed earlier had left the clusters unable to reach the image registry.

   Root cause

   DNS or network fault

   Component

   Container memory limitContainer registry and its credentials

   Contributing factor

   Overlapping failuresHarmful manual actionSingle point of failure

   Remediation

   • restarted the process with the cached DNS records so the clusters could reach the registry
   • fetched the container images, redeployed and recovered the services

   Action items

   • Improve monitoring so pod restarts cannot fail again in the same pattern
   • Minimise the dependency on the image registry
   • Expand validation during DNS changes
   • Re-evaluate all existing Kubernetes deployment policies
   • Improve progressive deployments so the impact of a deployment can be evaluated incrementally

   Lessons

   A container that production traffic does not need can still take pods out of service, because a pod is available only when all of its containers are healthy. ImagePullPolicy Always turns every container restart into a registry dependency, so an unrelated DNS change that breaks registry access turns a one-minute self-healing event into a long outage, and a mass redeploy spreads it.

   View case
4. IL-0037 Image registry rate-limited a whole region after a crash-looping DaemonSet with imagePullPolicy Always pulled through three NAT instances

   Datadog2019

   Symptoms

   Users reported that their jobs were not starting, with some sign that image pulls were involved. Many pods across the cluster were in error states related to image pulls, while applications that were already running were not affected.

   Image pull failuresService outage

   Trigger

   A change to the permissions on a storage bucket that one application needed to read. The application could no longer start, and its DaemonSet, running on roughly a thousand nodes of the cluster, went into a crash loop with imagePullPolicy: Always, so every restart pulled the image again although it was already on the node.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Container registry and its credentialsNAT gatewayApplication databaseAdmission webhook

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationSingle point of failureUnknown limitHarmful manual actionExcessive blast radius

   Detection

   Users reported that their jobs were not starting; monitoring had not caught it first.

   Remediation

   • replaced the affected NAT instances so registry traffic came from new source IPs
   • reconfigured the static IPs and firewall rules so applications could reach the Cloud SQL database again

   Action items

   • Add an admission webhook that rejects floating image tags, starting with latest
   • Apply the image tag webhook to workload objects only, not to pods, after it blocked pods created by in-cluster controllers

   Lessons

   The speakers' takeaway is to be very careful with DaemonSets in large clusters: they say they had broken everything DaemonSets depend on, including DNS, Vault and the image repository, and that it is very easy to break things when managing them by the thousand. imagePullPolicy: Always made every crash-loop restart pull the image again. Sending all registry traffic through three NAT instances put the whole region behind three source IPs, which the registry rate-limited, and changing those IPs cut the connections to a critical database reached over the internet through them. An admission webhook on pods rejects the pods that controllers in the cluster create, where no user sees the error.

   View case
5. IL-0059 Single-master Kubernetes control plane kept dying because the kubelet restarted a healthy etcd on a failing kubeadm liveness probe

   NRE Labs2018

   Symptoms

   The daily NRE Labs statistics showed lesson activity collapsing, and kubectl could not reach the cluster: `The connection to the server 1.2.3.4:6443 was refused - did you specify the right host or port?`

   Control plane unresponsiveProbe failuresService outage

   Trigger

   Unknown. The liveness probe that kubeadm writes into the etcd static pod manifest (an `etcdctl get foo` against 127.0.0.1:2379, failureThreshold 8, timeoutSeconds 15) started failing. The author first suspected GCP maintenance the night before, but could not reproduce the probe failure by hand and does not know why it began.

   Root cause

   unknown

   Component

   etcdkubeletKubernetes API server

   Contributing factor

   Single point of failureUnreviewed defaultsHarmful manual actionIgnored early signalMonitoring blind spot

   Detection

   The author saw lesson activity drop in the daily NRE Labs statistics during his morning routine.

   Remediation

   • removed the liveness probe section from the kubeadm-generated etcd static pod manifest and applied it between etcd restarts

   Action items

   • Add monitoring, especially for the single-node master
   • Run a basic "down for maintenance" page in Google Cloud Functions that points to Twitter for updates, to redirect to during outages

   Lessons

   Because all of the infrastructure is managed as code, the cluster could be rebuilt quickly, but destroying it before finding the cause also destroyed the evidence. Monitoring matters, especially with a single-node master. Read the restart counts in kubectl output, not just the Running status. Remember the fundamentals instead of expecting the issue to be more complicated than it is, and do not let the urgency of an outage push you into hasty decisions. Put up a maintenance page instead of leaving the site failing halfway.

   View case

By root cause5