Incident Library
Applied filters ComponentOn-premises load balancerSymptomHigh latencyClear allEvery case under the filters, with no sentence; newest first.
Suggested filters Search, and the values found in your words appear here.

Graph

  • Root cause
  • Component
  • Symptom
  • Contributing factor
  • Case

Cases2 cases

1 to 2 of 2

  1. Symptoms

    On 17 August 2026 from 13:40 UTC, GitHub issues and pull requests returned errors and slow responses on their pages and in the API. Automated monitoring detected the raised errors, and many other services that route through the same datacenter's load balancers, including the REST and GraphQL APIs, Actions, Copilot, sign-in and authentication, and the webhooks API, also showed errors and latency.

    Trigger

    A new peak in traffic pushed the load balancers of one GitHub datacenter past their limits.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Detection

    Automated monitoring detected the elevated errors and an incident was opened; the affected products were marked degraded on the public status page.

    Remediation
    • Shifted some traffic to another datacenter
    • Reduced gateway retries to relieve the pressure on the load balancers
    • Stopped the load-balancer processes on the saturated nodes
    • Blocked the retry-triggering requests to the most affected internal endpoint
    • Ramped traffic back up gradually to stabilise the remaining authentication errors
    Action items
    • Correct autoscaling policies so they account for service-mesh sidecar concurrency and capacity, not just the host service
    • Audit request, concurrency and scaling limits for the service mesh across the affected services
    • Review retry and backoff limits across gateways and clients
    • Fix the client retry behavior that amplified authentication traffic
    • Improve load-balancer capacity monitoring
    • Strengthen regional failover safeguards
    Lessons

    GitHub named the core weakness as the service-mesh sidecar that did not scale up, together with its retry behavior, and clients that were not bound enough to keep a partial degradation from amplifying into a broader overload.

  2. Symptoms

    On Tuesday 1 September 2020 Basecamp could not be loaded at all for 17 minutes, from 9:51am to 10:08am Central Time (14:51–15:08 UTC), and nothing seemed to work. On Wednesday 2 September it happened again for 15 minutes, from 10:50am to 11:05am Central Time (15:50–16:05 UTC).

    Trigger

    On 1 September the network links between the data centers went offline, and during the recovery a hardware load balancer crashed. On 2 September the primary load balancer in Virginia crashed again, and later its secondary crashed too.

    Root cause
    Component
    Contributing factor
    Remediation
    • On 1 September, intervened by hand to get the network routers working with the standby load balancer
    • On 2 September, fixed the same router and load balancer desynchronization by hand
    Action items
    • Find the cause of the load balancer crash with the vendor and apply its bugfix
    • Replace the hardware load balancers
    • Reroute the redundant cross-datacenter network paths for proper circuit diversity
    • Evaluate moving from hardware to software load balancers, which can be deployed in minutes
    • Evaluate decentralizing the load balancer architecture to limit the impact of one failure
    • Assess the systems for resilience, fragility and risk, and review the assessment process itself
    Lessons

    Basecamp plans for failures like these and practises responses to catastrophic failures in its live systems, but three obscure issues in five days chained into overlapping failures. What caught the team by surprise were cascading failures that exposed unexpected fragility and hard paths to recovery, which Basecamp says it can prepare for.

Check your cluster for this

These 2 cases involve On-premises load balancer and Backbone network (WAN). kubegap audits a Kubernetes cluster for gaps like these, read-only, from Claude Code or Codex; its checks cite public reports like the ones in this library.

By root cause2