No ticket support for paid Load Balancing service?


I posted a ticket for what appears to be a bug in the (paid) load balancing service and I have got no answer 11 days later - just the automated one. The load balancing setup is on a domain with a free plan but the service itself is paid ($15/month) and we do have a domain on a paid CF plan in the same account. We are basically testing the setup on the free plan before deploying it on the paid one (so it does pertain to the paid service, which I have described in the ticket). The ticket ID is #2360608, the url is:

Basically what I am trying to do is the “Example configuration” given at the bottom of this page:
The problem is that the load balancing custom rule override doesn’t work even in the simplest scenario with string matching in the URL.

So can I get at least some sort of a response? I do not consider this level of support normal. I have used cheaper services (i.e. $5 VPS) that provide 24 hour support and answer within the hour. And I don’t want to be renewing a service that doesn’t seem to be working with the hope that I get a response from support at some point.

Thank you for your help, much appreciated!

Ok, I’ll be waiting for someone from your team to contact me.

1 Like

Hi @user21044,

Support levels are done based on the plan type for the domain (excluding Enterprise). Unfortunately paid add-on services do not entitle you to ticketed support unless they specifically include that.

Can you post a screenshot of your configuration so someone here with experience with this feature may be able to help?

Also just to check that you followed this key part of the doc:

To save a new load balancer rule, make sure to save both the rule and the overall load balancer configuration.


@ domjh We do have multiple paid plan domains (one of them in the same account) and the idea is that you test a feature on a non-prod test domain (the free plan one) before you move it to a prod one (the paid plan one). As is the case with this load balancing testing. You’re saying that I should enable a possibly buggy feature on a paid prod domain so I can get support? Or are you are telling me that apart from the $15/month for the load balancing feature, which doesn’t seem to work, I now must pay another $20 so someone from support might possibly answer at some point? I understand this “entitlement to support” policy but it sounds a bit nasty, don’t you think? Maybe I actually will be paying for this service on a monthly basis IF it works, which is good for you. And maybe it’s good for you if people actually report bugs so your “first class citizens” - read enterprise clients - get a working service and are satisfied with it. So…

I have set up the load balancer custom rule in accordance with your dev docs (the double saving you mentioned as well). It’s all in the ticket, including a screenshot of the configuration. I’ll post it here too, with an excerpt from the info I posted in the ticket:

My load balancing setup is the following: two pools with a server each, a health monitor for each of them (default settings), traffic steering set to “Geo steering”, I have assigned a pool for every geo region. This setup works as expected.

I am trying to make a Custom Rule so that specific url requests containing a string (the simplest test case) are ALWAYS directed to the same pool, overriding the geo-steering policy. This does NOT work. The “Respond with fixed response” option works.

Custom rule config image attached.

I do understand your frustration with support, however there is nothing the community can do about this and support for free plans generally has to come through here. If there does appear to be an issue which you cannot resolve yourself then the issue can be escalated but it does take some time as free plans are bottom of the queue, I’m afraid.

Thanks for confirming that.

The community can only see what you post here, not what’s in the ticket.

That’s interesting, so the rule is activating OK as that is working but the override is not.

I am not too familiar with this setup myself, does it work as expected if you remove the And Terminates part of the rule? I’m not clear on whether that will terminate after overriding the pool or whether it would actually do the opposite.

@ domjh Thank you for trying to help.

The “And” + “Terminates” option doesn’t change anything. With or without it the result is the same - no override.

That is odd. Maybe another @MVP has more experience with Load Balancing rules.

Can you please escalate (or whatever the process is) this issue and ask community members that you know are more experienced in CF load balancing to look at this. Obviously if this basic setup doesn’t work, the whole custom rule option is pretty much non-functional, meaning it’s not a trivial matter (or at least it shouldn’t be). Thank you for your help, much appreciated!

I have already tagged the other MVPs to see if any of them know more about this. If there isn’t a solution by tomorrow then I can escalate the ticket but it will probably take a few days.

1 Like

Ok, thank you.

1 Like

I’ve escalated the ticket for the support team as it doesn’t seem like anyone here can help.

Thank you very much. Does that mean that they’re going to be looking at the issue for sure?

The ticket will get reviewed and you’ll probably hear back there. I can’t guarantee how long it will take given there is a long queue but I’m hopeful it will be this week.

Ok, thank you for your time!

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 15 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.