I'll add something along these lines. Thanks.
>>I think a max-cost link should be treated as unreachable, since that is
>>probably why it was set to max cost.
AA>> The condition I have for LFA is that if the cost of the link or the
> cost of the associated reverse link are
AA>> max-cost or (for ISIS) the neighbor is over-loaded, then don't consider
> the link as a candidate alternate
AA>> next-hop. For PLSN, I'd modify it to the following. "If no links to a
> neighbor could be considered as a
AA>> candidate alternate next-hop and the neighbor is not either a new
> primary neighbor or a old primary
AA>> neighbor, then the neighbor cannot be a safe neighbor. "
Rtgwg mailing list