Same mechanism category. Different failure surfaces.

Typical failure surface: tail spikes, retry storms, queue avalanches during volatility.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: contains escalation; prevents systemic saturation; keeps failure local.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: thundering herds, brownouts, overload loops.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: prevents unbounded amplification; enforces bounded degradation.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: signalling storms, cascading retries, control-plane saturation.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: bounds propagation and stabilizes recovery trajectories.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: partial failures causing retry cascades and inconsistent state pressure.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: keeps instability from spreading across dependent services.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: feedback oscillations and safe-mode storms from uncertain sensors.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: constrains unsafe escalation; stabilizes bounded recovery.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: local disruption triggering network-wide knock-ons.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: bounds disruption propagation beyond origin.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: backlog spirals and cascading re-plans.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: prevents runaway amplification under stress.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: interface backlog cascades during partial outages.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: contains system-wide degradation to local boundaries.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: data loss causing oscillatory control decisions.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: enforces bounded behavior under uncertainty.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: localized defects triggering global line stoppage chains.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: keeps instability local; reduces propagation paths.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: alert floods causing response collapse.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: bounds worst-case load and prevents collapse cascades.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: regional outages amplifying globally via retries.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: prevents retry-driven amplification across regions.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: surge events causing multi-service cascades.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: bounded degradation without system-wide propagation.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: hot paths saturating dependencies and cascading failures.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: keeps degradation local; bounds systemic exposure.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: device reconnect storms and command fan-out overload.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: prevents fan-out amplification; bounded control.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.

Typical failure surface: scheduler thrash and queue collapse under uncertainty.

• Without: local instability can amplify via retries, queues, and coupled dependencies.
• With NEST: constrains worst-case scheduling cascades.
• Framing: structural effect only (illustrative), not a performance claim.