Re: [sfc] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-ecn-support-11.txt

Hi authors,

It says in section 1.3 that "Any action by a tunnel ingress to reduce congestion needs to allow sufficient time for the end-to-end congestion control loop to respond first". 
As for the trigger order of end-to-end congestion control or tunnel congestion control, have other auxiliary materials given the answer about which is better to react first? I am confused why the ingress of the tunnel is not the first to respond, which can minimize the scope of the impact (for example, the congestion can be mitigated just within a certain SFC domain). I think there may be some proof or explanation why "the system is otherwise unstable".

Best,
Hongyi

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sfc <sfc-bounces@ietf.org> On Behalf Of internet-
> drafts@ietf.org
> Sent: Saturday, April 29, 2023 5:50 AM
> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org
> Cc: sfc@ietf.org
> Subject: [sfc] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-ecn-support-11.txt
> 
> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories. This Internet-Draft is a work item of the Service Function
> Chaining (SFC) WG of the IETF.
> 
>    Title           : Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) and Congestion
> Feedback Using the Network Service Header (NSH) and IPFIX
>    Authors         : Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd
>                      Bob Briscoe
>                      Yizhou Li
>                      Andrew G. Malis
>                      Xinpeng Wei
>    Filename        : draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-ecn-support-11.txt
>    Pages           : 31
>    Date            : 2023-04-28
> 
> Abstract:
>    Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) allows a forwarding element
> to
>    notify downstream devices of the onset of congestion without having
>    to drop packets.  Coupled with a means to feed information about
>    congestion back to upstream nodes, this can improve network
>    efficiency through better congestion control, frequently without
>    packet drops.  This document specifies ECN and congestion feedback
>    support within a Service Function Chaining (SFC) enabled domain
>    through use of the Network Service Header (NSH, RFC 8300) and IP
> Flow
>    Information Export (IPFIX, RFC 7011) protocol.
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this Internet-Draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-ecn-support/
> 
> There is also an HTML version available at:
> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-ecn-support-11.html
> 
> A diff from the previous version is available at:
> https://author-tools.ietf.org/iddiff?url2=draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-ecn-support-11
> 
> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-
> drafts
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sfc mailing list
> sfc@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sfc