Cases2 cases

1 to 2 of 2

1. 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
2. IL-0537 Sakura Cloud host servers repeatedly lost their storage connection, about five minutes per port switchover

   Sakura Internet2012

   Symptoms

   From mid-December 2011, after Sakura Cloud launched, traffic between the host servers and the storage device grew, and the network connection between the hosts that carry users' servers and the storage device was cut again and again. Each cut caused by a port switchover lasted about five minutes.

   Storage disconnected or stale mountsPacket loss

   Trigger

   Traffic between the host servers and the storage device grew from mid-December 2011, after the service launched on 15 November 2011.

   Root cause

   Capacity exhaustion

   Component

   Cloud block storageInfiniBand fabric

   Contributing factor

   Automation amplificationUnrepresentative stagingLimited debug access

   Remediation

   • Switched the network interface monitoring from ICMP to a LINK state check, so the device fails over only on a physical link down
   • Changed the InfiniBand Subnet Manager's check from normal mode to heavy sweep mode
   • Updated the storage device firmware on 19 March, which stopped the packet loss
   • Added a second storage device on 12 March and migrated servers to it to reduce and spread the load

   Action items

   • Replace the current storage with an entirely different new storage device
   • Test the new storage in an environment equal to its maximum capacity under real load, with a free beta before paid service
   • Use network interface drivers and similar parts equivalent to those already proven on the host servers
   • Develop the new storage with in-house engineers so Sakura Internet can manage and operate it itself

   Lessons

   Sakura Internet wrote that it could not test the storage device at its performance limit, because it could not prepare as many servers as the design capacity and used load generated from predictions, so it could not respond quickly and accurately to problems in real operation. Packet loss on the InfiniBand port kept the device below its expected performance and took three months to fix by firmware, and its engineers could not grasp the whole of the device's specification and behaviour. Sakura Internet concluded that its process for choosing and validating the storage device had serious problems.

   View case

By root cause2