Hi Sasha,

That’s correct, an editorial mis-expansion of the acronym LSP. It should be 
“Link State Packet”.


— Carlos.

On Sep 20, 2016, at 4:27 AM, Alexander Vainshtein 

Hi all,
I have found the following problematic text in Section 10.1.2 of RFC 5882:
   If multiple topologies are used to support multiple data protocols (or
   multiple classes of service of the same data protocol), the topology-
   specific path associated with a failing BFD session should no longer
   be advertised in IS-IS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in order to signal
   a lack of connectivity.
<end quote>

I suspect that LSP in this context stands for Link State Packet and not for 
Label Switched Path.

If my understanding is correct, is this observation worth an Editorial Errata?


Office: +972-39266302
Cell:      +972-549266302

Reply via email to