Cases3 cases

1 to 3 of 3

1. IL-0098 After 2i2c moved from ingress-nginx to nginx-ingress, a hub's Ingress took priority over cert-manager's temporary Ingress for the same host, so new hubs could not get TLS certificates

   2i2c2026

   Symptoms

   An attempt to launch a new hub failed because its ingress could not obtain a new TLS certificate. The day before, the same engineer had recreated the support deployment on the 2i2c-aws-us cluster and seen its TLS certificate orders stuck pending.

   Misrouted requestsDeploys failing

   Trigger

   Creating new hub deployments that needed new TLS certificates on clusters recently migrated from ingress-nginx to nginx-ingress.

   Root cause

   Breaking change in an upgrade

   Component

   Ingress controllercert-manager

   Contributing factor

   Change with a delayed effect

   Detection

   An attempt to launch a new hub failed; the engineer had seen certificate orders stuck pending on another cluster the day before and declared an incident.

   Remediation

   • annotated the Ingress objects that need TLS so that cert-manager could edit them in place to complete the ACME challenge

   Action items

   • Follow-up tracked in https://github.com/2i2c-org/infrastructure/issues/8016
   • Follow-up tracked in https://github.com/2i2c-org/infrastructure/issues/3278

   Lessons

   Swapping one ingress controller for another can change how Ingress objects that share a host are combined. cert-manager's temporary challenge Ingress depends on that behaviour, so the breakage shows up when a deployment needs a new certificate. 2i2c notes that it got lucky: it had already learned of this possible cause while testing on an internal cluster, and changing the cert-manager configuration was quick.

   View case
2. IL-0186 Pods on one Kubernetes worker node could not reach external HTTP and HTTPS because storage components had added nat PREROUTING rules that redirected ports 80 and 443 to local ports

   Hans H. Kim2023

   Symptoms

   On one worker node of a Kubernetes cluster, traffic to ports 80 and 443 went missing: pods on that node could not make outbound HTTP or HTTPS requests. Infrastructure engineers and the author's teammates debugged it.

   Misrouted requests

   Trigger

   A server on which components for storage work had been installed automatically added nat REDIRECT rules for ports 80 and 443 to the node's iptables.

   Root cause

   Configuration change

   Component

   Node iptables rules

   Contributing factor

   –

   Remediation

   • had the people responsible for the storage components delete the REDIRECT rules from the node

   Lessons

   Inside Kubernetes, kube-proxy itself manages iptables rules, so the author felt that part needs to be understood in depth. When packets go missing during network tests, check each step of the path in turn, which requires knowing clearly which steps the networking goes through.

   View case
3. IL-0506 UC Berkeley DataHub logins failed and students got empty home directories after the JupyterHub database was overwritten

   UC Berkeley2017

   Symptoms

   At about 1 AM on 9 February 2017, UC Berkeley's DataHub was reported down: users trying to log in got a proxy error. The hub pod was running, but its log was full of sqlite errors.

   Service outageData lossMisrouted requests

   Trigger

   While debugging, an operator ran `.save jupyterhub.sqlite` in sqlite3 inside the hub pod without having attached the database, which replaced the JupyterHub database file with an empty one.

   Root cause

   Operator error

   Component

   DatabasePersistent volumes and stateful setsJupyterHub

   Contributing factor

   No safeguard on destructive changeUnsafe failure behaviourHarmful manual action

   Detection

   DataHub was reported down at about 1 AM, when users got a proxy error at login. At 1:12 AM a user reported that he could log in but all his notebooks were gone.

   Remediation

   • Scaled the hub to 0 replicas
   • Rebuilt the JupyterHub sqlite database by matching Kubernetes PVC names back to user ids
   • Set cookie_id to null instead of a dummy value and attached the rebuilt database to the hub
   • Changed the cookie secret in the hub pod and restarted it to log all users out
   • Deleted all user pods to log everyone out
   • Ran a script that filled in cookie_id for all users, restarted the hub and deleted all user pods again
   • Dropped the new users with a '.' in their name and renamed the older users from '-' to '.'

   Action items

   • Report upstream that JupyterHub uses only part of the cookie secret and discards the rest
   • Report upstream that the cookie_id column of the users table should have UNIQUE and NOT NULL constraints
   • Ask KubeSpawner to support username hashes in PVC and pod names so the names stay the same when the database is deleted
   • Ask OAuthenticator to support using the id from the Google authenticator as the user id, giving stable user ids
   • Switch to Google Cloud SQL, a hosted and managed MySQL database
   • Take regular and tested backups of the database
   • Start an operational FAQ of things to do and not to do
   • Set up better monitoring and paging
   • Document escalation procedures explicitly

   View case

By root cause3