Which two options are Loop-Free Alternate design considerations? (Choose two)

MPLS TE is not required for LFA - LFA is an IGP-native IP Fast Reroute mechanism that uses SPF calculations and does not rely on MPLS TE tunnels for building backup paths.

LFA backup coverage is entirely dependent on whether a neighboring node offers a loop-free alternate path per the inequality check defined in RFC 5286. In topologies with few alternate paths, many prefixes will have no LFA coverage, making topology a primary design constraint.

LFA does not simplify capacity planning - because the backup path often differs from the post-convergence path, capacity planning must account for two separate traffic distributions, increasing complexity.

LFA does not inherently avoid low-bandwidth or edge links - the backup next-hop is selected purely based on the loop-free inequality check, with no automatic exclusion of low-bandwidth interfaces.

During IGP convergence, LFA reroutes traffic to a pre-computed backup path that may traverse low-bandwidth or congested links. This can violate latency, jitter, or bandwidth SLAs for real-time or SLA-sensitive traffic flows until the primary path is restored.