Terraform: Error retrieving policy: LoadBalancerNotFound: There is no ACTIVE Load Balancer

[FransUrbo]

I'm getting the error:

* aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy.INSTANCE: Error retrieving policy: LoadBalancerNotFound: There is no ACTIVE Load Balancer named 'ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE'
        status code: 400, request id: a9f37732-eb7e-11e5-bdd8-a7fc077a93a7

resource "aws_elb" "INSTANCE" {
  name = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  subnets = [ "${aws_subnet.private.id}" ]
  internal = true

  listener {
    instance_port = 22
    instance_protocol = "tcp"
    lb_port = 22
    lb_protocol = "tcp"
  }

  health_check {
    healthy_threshold = 2
    unhealthy_threshold = 2
    timeout = 3
    target = "TCP:22"
    interval = 30
  }

  cross_zone_load_balancing = false
  idle_timeout = 400
  connection_draining = true
  connection_draining_timeout = 400

  tags {
    Name = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  }
}

resource "aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy" "INSTANCE" {
  name = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  load_balancer = "${aws_elb.INSTANCE.id}"
  lb_port = 22
  cookie_expiration_period = 600
}

It needs to create the aws_elb first, THEN create the aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy, but it doesn't.

This is latest master (1bfa436). Doesn't work with 0.6.11 either though.

[FransUrbo]

Only way to recover from this now, even if I comment out these in the config, is to edit .terraform/terraform.tfstate manually and remove them from there.

[phinze]

Hi @FransUrbo - thanks for the report.

Testing your provided config (with a VPC and Subnet added):

resource "aws_vpc" "foo" {
  cidr_block = "10.0.0.0/16"
}

resource "aws_subnet" "private" {
  vpc_id     = "${aws_vpc.foo.id}"
  cidr_block = "10.0.0.0/24"
}

resource "aws_elb" "INSTANCE" {
  name     = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  subnets  = [ "${aws_subnet.private.id}" ]
  internal = true

  listener {
    instance_port     = 22
    instance_protocol = "tcp"
    lb_port           = 22
    lb_protocol       = "tcp"
  }

  health_check {
    healthy_threshold   = 2
    unhealthy_threshold = 2
    timeout             = 3
    target              = "TCP:22"
    interval            = 30
  }

  cross_zone_load_balancing   = false
  idle_timeout                = 400
  connection_draining         = true
  connection_draining_timeout = 400

  tags {
    Name = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  }
}

resource "aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy" "INSTANCE" {
  name                     = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  load_balancer            = "${aws_elb.INSTANCE.id}"
  lb_port                  = 22
  cookie_expiration_period = 600
}

I get a different error message:

Error applying plan:

1 error(s) occurred:

* aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy.INSTANCE: Error setting LBCookieStickinessPolicy: InvalidConfigurationRequest: ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE can be associated only with a listener with one of HTTP, HTTPS as frontend protocol
        status code: 409, request id: 8152cf0d-ebaf-11e5-900f-313d79e903d1

Correcting for that error message by changing the listener to HTTP, the following config successfully applies for me:

resource "aws_vpc" "foo" {
  cidr_block = "10.0.0.0/16"
}

resource "aws_subnet" "private" {
  vpc_id     = "${aws_vpc.foo.id}"
  cidr_block = "10.0.0.0/24"
}

resource "aws_elb" "INSTANCE" {
  name     = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  subnets  = [ "${aws_subnet.private.id}" ]
  internal = true

  listener {
    instance_port     = 80
    instance_protocol = "http"
    lb_port           = 80
    lb_protocol       = "http"
  }

  health_check {
    healthy_threshold   = 2
    unhealthy_threshold = 2
    timeout             = 3
    target              = "HTTP:80/healthcheck"
    interval            = 30
  }

  cross_zone_load_balancing   = false
  idle_timeout                = 400
  connection_draining         = true
  connection_draining_timeout = 400

  tags {
    Name = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  }
}

resource "aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy" "INSTANCE" {
  name                     = "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  load_balancer            = "${aws_elb.INSTANCE.id}"
  lb_port                  = 80
  cookie_expiration_period = 600
}

Let me know if the above sheds any light on things from your side. :+1:

[FransUrbo]

But did you start from scratch after the changing the aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy resource? Because second time, it works for me to (with the same change as you - that might have slipped by me when I cut-and-pasted).

The problem only arises the FIRST time (as in, "from scratch").

[phinze]

Yep, both of the above examples - the error message and the successful apply - were first-run results.

Just reran terraform destroy -force; terraform apply on that final config and got:

aws_vpc.foo: Creating...
  cidr_block:                "" => "10.0.0.0/16"
  default_network_acl_id:    "" => "<computed>"
  default_security_group_id: "" => "<computed>"
  dhcp_options_id:           "" => "<computed>"
  enable_classiclink:        "" => "<computed>"
  enable_dns_hostnames:      "" => "<computed>"
  enable_dns_support:        "" => "<computed>"
  main_route_table_id:       "" => "<computed>"
aws_vpc.foo: Creation complete
aws_subnet.private: Creating...
  availability_zone:       "" => "<computed>"
  cidr_block:              "" => "10.0.0.0/24"
  map_public_ip_on_launch: "" => "0"
  vpc_id:                  "" => "vpc-4bbc442f"
aws_subnet.private: Creation complete
aws_elb.INSTANCE: Creating...
  availability_zones.#:                   "" => "<computed>"
  connection_draining:                    "" => "1"
  connection_draining_timeout:            "" => "400"
  cross_zone_load_balancing:              "" => "0"
  dns_name:                               "" => "<computed>"
  health_check.#:                         "" => "1"
  health_check.0.healthy_threshold:       "" => "2"
  health_check.0.interval:                "" => "30"
  health_check.0.target:                  "" => "HTTP:80/healthcheck"
  health_check.0.timeout:                 "" => "3"
  health_check.0.unhealthy_threshold:     "" => "2"
  idle_timeout:                           "" => "400"
  instances.#:                            "" => "<computed>"
  internal:                               "" => "1"
  listener.#:                             "" => "1"
  listener.3057123346.instance_port:      "" => "80"
  listener.3057123346.instance_protocol:  "" => "http"
  listener.3057123346.lb_port:            "" => "80"
  listener.3057123346.lb_protocol:        "" => "http"
  listener.3057123346.ssl_certificate_id: "" => ""
  name:                                   "" => "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  security_groups.#:                      "" => "<computed>"
  source_security_group:                  "" => "<computed>"
  source_security_group_id:               "" => "<computed>"
  subnets.#:                              "" => "1"
  subnets.1783237449:                     "" => "subnet-04b9895d"
  tags.#:                                 "" => "1"
  tags.Name:                              "" => "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  zone_id:                                "" => "<computed>"
aws_elb.INSTANCE: Creation complete
aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy.INSTANCE: Creating...
  cookie_expiration_period: "" => "600"
  lb_port:                  "" => "80"
  load_balancer:            "" => "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
  name:                     "" => "ENVIRONMENT-INSTANCE"
aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy.INSTANCE: Creation complete

Apply complete! Resources: 4 added, 0 changed, 0 destroyed.

[FransUrbo]

Hmm, weird. Ok, I'll close it for now and I'll investigate further if/when it happens again.

Thanx for the look!

[FransUrbo]

Try to run it, then delete the ELB from the AWS Console, then run TF again and see if that changes things.

Because if after I have the whole TF setup passing without problem go in and delete all the ELBs in the Console and rerun TF, I get this error. If I then remove all the references to the stickiness, policies and schedules, everything works.

So I think it's TF that is/gets confused some how.

[simple-guy]

I saw this issue has resolved in 7065

[stack72]

Closed via #7166 sorry for not updating this sooner

[nickgrealy]

For me, I was mixing the old "Elastic Load Balancing (ELB Classic)" aws_lb_cookie_stickiness_policy, with the new "Elastic Load Balancing v2 (ALB/NLB)" aws_lb - which obviously doesn't work (aws_lb naming for classic is misleading though!).

_Be aware of the difference._

I should've been using aws_lb_target_group.stickiness instead.

[hashibot[bot]]

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for _30 days_ ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.