Cases6 cases

1 to 5 of 6

1. IL-0150 A latent race condition in DynamoDB's DNS automation left an empty DNS record for dynamodb.us-east-1.amazonaws.com, and the DynamoDB and EC2 launch failures that followed caused EKS, ECS and Fargate container launch failures and cluster scaling delays in us-east-1

   Amazon Web Services2025

   Symptoms

   At 11:48 PM PDT on 19 October 2025, every system that reached DynamoDB in us-east-1 through the public regional endpoint started getting DNS failures and could not connect. This included customer traffic and internal AWS services that depend on DynamoDB. DynamoDB global table replicas in other regions still answered but fell behind in replication to and from us-east-1.

   DNS resolution failuresHigh error rateScale-up failureIntermittent connection failuresHigh latency

   Trigger

   One DNS Enactor, slowed by unusually high retry delays, applied a much older DNS plan to the regional DynamoDB endpoint just as another Enactor that had applied the newest plan ran its clean-up, which deleted that older plan and with it every IP address of the endpoint.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Authoritative DNS servers and recordsApplication databaseCloud load balancer

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationRetry stormNo runbook

   Detection

   DNS failures to DynamoDB began immediately at 11:48 PM PDT and the engineering teams of affected AWS services were engaged at once; by 12:38 AM they had identified DynamoDB's DNS state as the source. The later NLB health check problem was detected by monitoring at 6:52 AM.

   Remediation

   • applied temporary mitigations by 1:15 AM that let some internal services reach DynamoDB and repaired key internal tooling
   • restored all DynamoDB DNS information by 2:25 AM through manual operator intervention
   • throttled incoming work and selectively restarted DWFM hosts from 4:14 AM so droplet leases could be re-established
   • reduced the load on Network Manager to bring network configuration propagation times back to normal by 10:36 AM
   • disabled automatic health check failover for NLB at 9:36 AM, and re-enabled it at 2:09 PM after EC2 recovered
   • relaxed the EC2 request throttles from 11:23 AM until all EC2 APIs and launches were normal at 1:50 PM

   Action items

   • Disable the DynamoDB DNS Planner and DNS Enactor automation worldwide
   • Fix the race condition and add protections against applying incorrect DNS plans before re-enabling the DNS automation
   • Add a velocity control to NLB that limits how much capacity a single load balancer can remove when health check failures cause availability zone failover
   • Build an additional EC2 test suite that exercises the DWFM recovery workflow at scale
   • Improve throttling in EC2 data propagation systems so incoming work is rate limited by the size of the waiting queue

   Lessons

   A single DNS record that automation can empty is enough to take a widely used regional endpoint off the network, and every service built on it fails in turn. A check made once at the start of a long operation can be stale by the time the operation writes its result. Recovery of the dependency is not recovery of the dependents: systems that lost state during the outage, such as EC2's droplet leases and network propagation backlog, can collapse under their own catch-up work, and container services that rely on new instance launches keep failing to launch and scale until that work is done.

   View case
2. IL-0112 The daily node rollover put DFDS's EKS nodes on an AMI later recalled for a kernel issue, causing "PLEG is not healthy" NodeNotReady flaps and pod network timeouts

   DFDS2022

   Symptoms

   On 2022-10-31 a planned upgrade of the vpc-cni EKS add-on, started from the deployment pipeline at 13:45 UTC, timed out at 14:10. Only about 10 of the 45 aws-node pods had upgraded, 5 were stuck in Terminating and the other 30 had not been attempted.

   Node NotReadyUpgrade stallIntermittent timeoutsIntermittent connection failures

   Trigger

   At 07:30 UTC on 2022-10-31 the daily node rollover replaced the existing nodes with nodes built from AMI v20221027, the latest AWS EKS node AMI, released on 2022-10-29 and later recalled because of a kernel issue.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Node operating system imageLinux kernelkubeletAWS VPC CNINode launch templateTerraform

   Contributing factor

   No staged rolloutAutomation amplificationOverlapping failuresMonitoring blind spotNo health probes

   Detection

   The team noticed nodes flapping between NodeNotReady and NodeReady ("KubeletNotReady PLEG is not healthy") at 14:30 UTC while watching the stalled vpc-cni upgrade, about seven hours after the rollover. Time to detection was 7 hours. Alerting did not catch the NodeNotReady events or the socket growth.

   Remediation

   • cordoned, drained and deleted 15 stuck nodes one at a time to complete the vpc-cni upgrade
   • changed the Terraform infrastructure-modules so a specific AMI could be set
   • rolled the EC2 Auto Scaling group launch configuration back to the previous known good AMI through the pipeline

   Action items

   • Reach out to teams with suggestions about readiness and liveness probes
   • Create a dashboard for readiness and liveness probe coverage
   • Write a wiki article on readiness and liveness probes and their usefulness
   • Modify infrastructure-modules to allow specifying a particular AMI
   • Schedule a discussion on whether to take the latest AMI immediately and how to test new AMIs before they are deployed
   • Implement alerting on abnormal NodeNotReady events and on increased socket use
   • Create a learning path for Kubernetes within the team
   • Collect logs from nodes centrally
   • Create a Prometheus exporter that retrieves the latest available AMI, with a dashboard and alerts

   Lessons

   When a new node AMI has just been rolled out, upgrading other cluster components on the same day makes it hard to tell which change is causing trouble; here the vpc-cni upgrade on the same day confused matters. Taking the latest AMI automatically with no way to pin one meant a rollback first needed a Terraform change. The team also concluded that it needs better communication paths with application teams during incidents.

   View case
3. IL-0012 CPU limits and an unpatched kernel CFS quota bug throttled multi-threaded services into stalls, failed health checks and timeouts

   Omio2020

   Symptoms

   For about six months, applications on Omio's Google Kubernetes Engine clusters stalled at random: they got stuck, stopped answering health check requests or lost network connections, and nothing the team looked at explained why.

   CPU throttlingProbe failuresHigh error rateHigh latencyIntermittent timeoutsIntermittent connection failures

   Trigger

   Multi-threaded workloads running with CPU limits on nodes whose kernel did not yet have the fix for a known CFS quota bug that causes unnecessary throttling.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Container CPU limitLinux kernelkubelet

   Contributing factor

   Unknown limitMonitoring blind spotUnpatched known bug

   Detection

   Months of random stalls and failed health checks led the team to read the cgroup cpu.stat throttling counters inside the pods, which showed far more throttling than the limits should allow.

   Remediation

   • removed CPU limits until the kernel with the CFS bug fix was deployed across all clusters

   Action items

   • Deploy the kernel with the CFS quota bug fix across all clusters
   • Monitor utilisation, saturation and error metrics, API latency and error rates to confirm the change behaves as expected

   Lessons

   A CPU limit is a time quota per 100 ms period, not a share of cores, so a multi-threaded container can be stopped for most of each period long before it uses the cores it was given, and a kernel bug can make that worse. Throttling is invisible in standard Kubernetes metrics and has to be read from the cgroup counters. Removing limits trades away protection against a container that takes a whole node, which is only acceptable when runtimes are tuned.

   View case
4. IL-0062 Intermittent 502 errors behind a GKE Ingress because pods shut down before the load balancer stopped sending them traffic

   Ravelin2019

   Symptoms

   After Ravelin moved its API layer from VMs into its GKE cluster behind a Kubernetes Ingress, the integration tests occasionally received 502 errors.

   Intermittent connection failuresStale endpoint routing

   Trigger

   Pods behind the Ingress being removed by their controller, as happens during rolling deploys and scaling.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Ingress controllerPod termination

   Contributing factor

   Unverified assumption

   Detection

   Integration tests occasionally received 502 errors.

   Lessons

   Removing a pod's endpoint and signalling the pod happen at the same time, and an ingress can take a long time to catch up. A pod behind an ingress should keep serving after SIGTERM until its grace period ends, and the grace period should be longer than the load balancer's reprogramming time.

   View case
5. IL-0011 HAProxy ingress piled requests onto the same pods because a Go template visited the backend map in sorted pod IP order

   Skyscanner2019

   Symptoms

   On a Sunday, a team using one of Skyscanner's Kubernetes clusters manually paged the out-of-hours Kubernetes support because their service showed elevated latency, worst at the p90 and maximum levels.

   High latencyLoad imbalanceOOMKilledIntermittent connection failures

   Trigger

   Upgrading the HAProxy ingress controller to v0.6 and going back from Service virtual IPs to individual pod IPs as backends, on the understanding that the sort-backends flag introduced in v0.5, false by default, meant backends were randomly shuffled.

   Root cause

   Software defect

   Component

   Ingress controllerHAProxyConfiguration templating

   Contributing factor

   Unrepresentative stagingUnverified assumptionIgnored early signal

   Detection

   A cluster user manually paged the out-of-hours Kubernetes support about elevated latency; Prometheus queries then showed the uneven request distribution across pods.

   Remediation

   • switched the affected service from pod IPs back to the Service virtual IP through a config change in the internal deployment tool Slingshot
   • patched the controller to keep each backend's servers in an insertion-ordered slice and changed the template to iterate over that slice
   • tested the patch in sandbox clusters and rolled it out to the production clusters

   Action items

   • Run the internal controller patch in production and return to pod IPs as the default backends
   • Raise the problem upstream with a GitHub issue and pull request
   • Test changes to cluster components against the specific behaviour and conditions that matter

   Lessons

   The team already knew that sorted backends cause hot-podding and still did not test the new flag well enough to see that it did not work; changes to cluster components need tests aimed at the exact behaviour that matters, under conditions like production. A keyword can behave differently in different parts of a language: range over a map is unordered in Go code but sorted in text/template. A small cluster component can do outsized harm to every user of the cluster and, in the end, to customers.

   View case

By root cause1