Stay Plugged In With Canon
Latest News & Updates

Load balancer stickiness, also called session persistence, is designed to keep a user’s requests routed to the same backend node for a period of time. When it breaks, clients may flicker between servers with no clear pattern, which complicates debugging and can degrade performance. The first step is to confirm that stickiness is actually enabled and configured for the chosen protocol, whether it’s cookies, IP affinity, or application-level tokens. Review the deployment’s documentation and any recent changes to TLS termination, WAF policies, or DNS artifacts, as these can inadvertently disrupt session routing. Collect baseline metrics, including request latency, error rates, and backend health status, to establish a reference for comparison.

After confirming stickiness is supposed to be active, examine how the client requests establish a session. If cookies are used, inspect cookie attributes such as the domain, path, secure, HttpOnly, and the sameSite policy, because mismatches can cause a new session to start on each request. For IP affinity, verify whether the source IP remains stable across requests; NAT, proxies, or client mobility can break the intended binding. If an application-layer token governs stickiness, ensure the token is consistently generated and sent with every request, and that the token’s scope and expiration align with the intended session window. Logs should reflect the session lifecycle clearly.

Begin with a controlled test environment that isolates the load balancer from the rest of the stack. Use a synthetic client with a defined session window and repeatable request patterns, and observe how the load balancer routes subsequent requests. Compare outcomes under different configurations: with explicit stickiness rules, with fallback to round robin, and with any rules disabled to understand baseline routing behavior. Pay attention to how health checks interact with routing: if a backend node is considered healthy intermittently, the balancer may divert traffic away, effectively breaking the illusion of stickiness. Document the results so changes can be mapped to outcomes in performance and reliability.

Examine the health check configuration precisely, since aggressive checks can cause nodes to be treated as unhealthy too quickly, triggering rebalancing. If a node’s response latency spikes during a session, the balancer might retry on another node, which undermines stickiness by design. Align health check intervals, timeouts, and success criteria with expected backend performance. Ensure that backends share consistent session state if required; otherwise, even with correct routing, sessions may appear to disappear when user data is not accessible on the same node. Finally, review any anomaly detectors that might override routing in case of suspected faults.

Another area to inspect is the cookie or token domain scope and how it’s applied across frontends, reverse proxies, and the core balancer. In a multi-zone deployment, cookie domains must be precise to prevent cross-zone leakage or misrouting, which can randomize the perceived stickiness. Ensure that all front-end listeners and back-end pools reference the same stickiness policy, and that any intermediate caches do not strip or rewrite cookies needed for session binding. If servers sit behind a CDN, verify that cache controls do not inadvertently terminate stickiness by serving stale or shared responses. Clear, explicit expiration and renewal behavior in the policy are critical for predictable routing.

Review the load balancer’s session persistence method for compatibility with the application. If the backend expects in-memory state, it is crucial to avoid session data loss during failovers or node restarts. Some environments rely on sticky sessions based on HTTP cookies; others implement IP affinity or app-level tokens. When using cookies, confirm that the signature, encryption, and validation logic remain intact between client and server, even after updates. In cloud environments with autoscaling, ensure that new instances receive the necessary session data quickly or that a central store is used to accelerate warm-up. Documentation should include explicit behavior during scaling events to prevent surprises.

Enable rich observability around session routing, including per-request logs that show which backend node was chosen and why. Instrumented traces should capture the stickiness decision point, whether it’s a cookie read, a token check, or an IP-derived affinity rule. Central dashboards can correlate user-reported latency with backend response times, highlighting if stickiness failures are localized to a subset of nodes. Use correlation IDs to tie requests across services and to identify patterns where sessions repeatedly switch back and forth between nodes. Regularly review the correlation data to detect drift, misconfiguration, or external interference, such as middleware that rewrites headers.

Diagnostics also benefit from controlled experiments that perturb one variable at a time. For example, temporarily disable a cookie-based stickiness policy and observe how the system behaves with round-robin routing. Then re-enable it and monitor how quickly and reliably the original session bindings reestablish. If the behavior changes after a recent deployment, compare the configuration and code changes that accompanied that release. Look for subtle issues like time synchronization problems across nodes, which can influence session timeout calculations and thus routing decisions. A methodical, incremental approach reduces guesswork and accelerates restoration of stable stickiness.

In some architectures, TLS termination points can influence stickiness by terminating and reissuing cookies or tokens. Ensure that secure channels preserve necessary header and cookie values as requests traverse proxies or edge devices. Misconfigured TLS session resumption can disrupt the binding logic, particularly if the session identifier changes across hops. Validate that every hop preserves the essential data used to sustain stickiness and that any re-encryption or re-signing steps do not corrupt the session identifier. It’s also wise to verify that front-end listeners and back-end pools agree on the same protocol and cipher suite to avoid unexpected renegotiations that could affect routing fidelity.

If you rely on DNS-based routing as a secondary selector, ensure that DNS caching and TTLs do not undermine stickiness. Some clients will re-resolve an endpoint during a session, causing a new connection to be established mid-session. In that case, the load balancer should still honor the existing policy without forcing a new binding, or else you must implement a forward-compatible mechanism that carries session identifiers across DNS changes. Consider using a stateful DNS strategy or coupling DNS with a reliable session token that persists across endpoint changes. Document DNS-related behavior so operators understand how name resolution interacts with stickiness.

When problems persist, create a canonical test case that reproducibly demonstrates stickiness failures. Include the exact request sequence, the headers or tokens involved, and the expected vs. actual node choices for each step. This artifact becomes a reference for future troubleshooting and for onboarding new operators. It should also describe the environment, including network topology, software versions, and any recent patches. A well-maintained test case reduces the time to identify whether a problem is due to configuration, code, or infrastructure. Use it as the baseline for experiments and as evidence during post-mortems to improve higher-level policies.

Finally, implement a formal rollback and change-control process so that any modification to stickiness rules can be reverted safely. Favor incremental deployments with feature flags or staged rollouts, allowing quick reversion if symptoms reappear. Pair configuration changes with observability checks that automatically verify whether stickiness is intact after each change. Establish a runbook that operators can follow during incidents, including when to escalate to platform engineers. By treating stickiness reliability as a live, evolving property, teams can maintain user experience while iterating on performance and scalability improvements.