HC102810R2039 CSC Questions.doc

HC102810R2039 CSC Questions Q1 - Is this a new requirement? Who is the incumbent? What was the previous contract number?

A1 - This is a new requirement and therefore no incumbent exists.

Q2 - Is this requirement the same as the CaaS RFI?

A2 - This Request for Proposal (RFP) named Capacity Services Communications (CSC) is a result of the Request for Information (RFI) named Communication as a Service (CaaS).

Q3 - Is the PWS referenced in section 7.3.3 (item number 2) is the same as the 12-page technical/management approach outlined in section 4.2 of the RFP? Or, is the PWS in addition to the technical/management approach and to be submitted with the contract volume?

A3 - Actually the wording Performance Work Statement (PWS) will be changed shortly with an amendment to the RFP. It will read Response to the Statement of Objectives (SOO) and would be included in your Contract Documentation (Section L, 2.2). The Technical Management document is a separate document with the 12-page limit as outlined in Section L, 4.2 of the RFP.

Q4 - Will there be page limits and a recommended structure set forth for the Response to the Statement of Objectives (SOO)?

A4 - The Response to the Statement of Objectives (SSO) will be in a PWS format as outlined in Section L Attachment 8 and limited to 50 pages.

Q5 - Is this requirement the same as the Capacity Processor which is up for recompete according to an article in Federal News?

A5 - This is a new requirement for Capacity Services Communication (CSC) and does not include a Capacity Processor requirement.

Q6 - I have heard that DISA CSD is providing each vendor interested in bidding the subject opportunity with an engineering representative form Netconn. Is this true? If so, how do we request such assistance?

A6 - This is not true.

Follow-on question to the previous question/answer:

Q7 - Based on your answer and the current work that Netconn is performing with respect to the networks, are they able to participate in the submission of the subject solicitation as a teaming partner, or would there be an OCI issue with their participation?

A7 - Yes, since this is a separate requirement and has no association with any current contract or effort that may involve Netconn at DISA. In addition, this requirement has not included the involvement of any contractors inside/outside DISA.

Q8 - I’m writing in regards to Solicitation number HC1028-10-R-2039 issued by DISA/DITCO-Scott AFB. Can you tell me where this solicitation is posted? eBuy, Fedbid, Fedbiz?

A8 - FedBizOps

Q9 - Please confirm the location of assets that are listed as Pacific and Europe. I am assuming all Pacific assets are at heeler Field. Not sure on the Europe assets.

A9 - DECC Europe Patch Barracks, Vaihingen, Germany and DECC Pacific Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

Q10 - I had a top secret clearance. That was 1973. Will I be required to have the secret clearance prior to submission of this bid, Oct 12? If so can you tell me where I need to call to begin the process?

A10 - The employees are required to have active secret IT Level I clearances. In addition, the company must have a facility clearance. Our experience is that a vendor will not be able to get both in the amount of time mentioned. Suggest you contact the small business administration for assistance with the process question.

Ref Section C – Description of Specifications/Statement of Objectives (SOO)(Q11-Q14) Q11 - General Question - Is there a definition of “Capacity Services”?

A11 - The ability to acquire capacity as a service provided by vendor partners. A capacity services solution for communication will provide hardware and software equipment including routers, switches, monitoring equipment, monitoring and reporting software and other supporting devices, as well as services on an on demand basis.

Q12 - What are the ingress and egress demarcation points of the service?

A12 - The demarcation point or perimeter of the network is defined by the device nearest to the Wide Area Network (WAN) circuit providing external connectivity to the Unclassified but Sensitive Internet Protocol (IP) Router Network (NIPRNet) or point to point circuit. An example of this would be an edge router that terminates the WAN connection or replication circuit. These connecting devices will be described in the representative maintenance list.

Q13 - Do the services include non-transport capabilities e.g., DNS, NTP?

A13 - Yes

Q14 - Are the Web DMZ’s considered a component of Capacity Services?

A14 - Yes

Ref SOO 3.1.1 Maintenance Response and Repair Time (Q15-Q17) Q15 - Repair Time - Is the time measurement to the point that the Capacity Service is restored or when all failed equipment is repaired?

A15 - The point when the equipment is repaired to original equipment manufacturer standards for operation and replaced to the same level of service before failure occurred, including any redundancy, is acceptable.

Q16 - Response and Repair Time - Is it acceptable to contact (instead of arrive at) the site within two hours as long as the repair is completed within 6 hours of being notified by the Government? A16 - No, the vendor must have someone on site by two hours.

Q17 - Is restoral of service acceptable versus repair?

A17 - The equipment must be repaired to original equipment manufacturer standards for operation and replaced to the same level of service before failure occurred including any redundancy is acceptable.

Ref SOO 3.1.1 Maintenance Response and Repair Time & 5.3 Performance/Availability (Q18-Q22) Q18 - 99.95% Availability requirement - What is the specific measurement of “availability” used for CSC?

A18 - Availability is measured using the government’s trouble management system. We take the downtime in our trouble tickets and subtract from the available time for the month. The availability metric is measured by device.

Q19 - Are servers/applications deployed with redundant interfaces?

A19 - Yes Q20 - How are DECC facility issues (e.g., power outage, HVAC failure or outside plant issues) accounted for in the availability requirement?

A20 - These are government issues which are outside contractors control and will not be counted.

Q21 - Are legacy applications/servers covered under the same availability requirement?

A21 -Yes.

Q22 - Do you plan to provide the “as-is” design documentation for the systems that will be assumed under CSC?

A22 – No, “as is” design documentation will not be provided to the offerors.

Ref SOO 3.1.3 Remote Diagnostics and Call-Home Support (Q23-Q26) Q23 - What specifically is Call-Home support?

A23 - This is when a piece of equipment notifies the vendor it is having problems.

Q24 - What specific remote diagnostic and call-home support is currently deployed by site?

A24 - None.

Q25 - When the dial-in usage is denied by the site do the restoral times still hold?

A25 - Yes, however, call home has a one way capability, dial-out only. Security doesn’t allow for a two way connection.

Q26 - Will the government provide a circuit connection from the contractors TAC?

A26 - No, call home has a one way capability. Security doesn’t allow for a two way connection.

Ref SOO 3.2.1 The Tech Refresh Program (Q27-Q30) Q27 - Under continuation will this place these subscribers’ requirements under the “ports” model and infrastructure?

A27 - Yes, per physical port basis.

Q28 - If not will these be priced on an individual case basis?

A28 - N/A based on answer to previous question Q27.

Q29 - Does modernization cover technology insertion that provides “new” CSC services?

A29 - This could be the case, but is mainly geared toward tech refreshing existing equipment with more technically advanced equipment.

Q30 - If so how is the design of these new services addressed?

A30 - The government will identify the need and the vendor will propose the solution.

Q31 - 3.2.2 Industry Standards - All of the subsections require the establishment of a process, what interfaces to existing DISA, other government or other contractor’s processes must be considered?

A31 - All processes identified follow the standard Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) framework process.

Ref SOO 3.2.2.5 Central Management (Q32-Q37) Q32 - Is this requirement to perform central management functions or only to procure these tools and software?

A32 - Only to procure these tools and software.

Q33 - Network management and Performance tools - Does the Contractor own the tools?

A33 - Any vendor provided software will be owned by the vendor and used by the government.

Q34 - If not what tools and specific versions are currently deployed?

A34 - N/A based on answer to previous question Q33.

Q35 - Can some or all of the tools be located within the contractor’s facility?

A35 - No.

Q36 - Can the network monitoring be performed from within the contractor’s facility?

A36 - No.

Q37 - If not what space is made available for this activity?

A37 - One of the DISA locations will be used to house the vendor’s support staff.

Ref SOO 3.5 End User and Business Transaction Management Software Services (Q38-Q47) Q38 - Is this requirement to operate the Business Transaction Management services or only to procure these tools and software?

A38 - The requirement for software is removed from the RFP.

Q39 - How are the results of the Business Transaction Management to be used, do they apply to a CSC performance metric?

A39 - They do not apply to the CSC performance.

Q40 - Does DISA already have acceptable Virtual User Generator scripts for the HP Business Process Monitor?

A40 - DISA has used Virtual User Generator to develop scripts for specific applications in the past.

Q41 - Will these be made available to the contractor prior to submission?

A41 - No.

Q42 - Will these be provided as GFI to the contractor upon award?

A42 - Yes.

Q43 - It appears that the HP BAC tools listed are already integral to the CSD SyNAPS service, are these servers and licenses owned by the Government and will they provided as GFE upon contract award?

A43 - No, they are not government owned.

Q44 - Given that the HP Real User Monitor relies on “sniffing” network traffic when will the “as is” topology of each DECC be provided to enable costing the quantity of servers required.

A44 - The software should be priced on a scalable basis.

Q45 - Given that the HP Business Process Monitor relies on agents deployed to represent users where and how many does DISA determine is necessary.

A45 - This will be decided post award.

Q46 - Of the identified software, what is GFE and what is to be priced by the offeror?

A46 - None of the software will be Government Furnished Equipment (GFE).

Q47 - Is the offeror only to price the software agents on a per port/device basis, or the central management servers as well?

A47 - The vendor should price just the software.

Ref SOO 5.4 Capacity (Q48-Q49) Q48 - What is the range of scalable?

A48 - There is no range. What we are saying is that the capacity must be scalable to both increase and decreases. We don’t have a fixed capacity through the life of the contract.

Q49 - Does the equipment need to be installed in a STIG compliant configuration, or is DISA going to handle STIG after power on acceptance?

A49 - The vendor will need to provide a Security Technical Implementation Guide (STIG) compliant configuration.

Q50 - 5.6 Integration/Interfaces - Must the equipment be selected from the DISA Approved Product List (APL)?

A50 - Yes, the equipment must come from the approved product list. However, the government will accept input from the contractor on new equipment available, but the final decision on the equipment list will be made by the government.

Q51 - 5.9 Transition Strategy - How can our proposal encompass “how the outgoing Contractor plans a smooth and successful transition to the incoming Contractor”?

A51 - Propose steps as the outgoing contractor you would take to insure a successful transition strategy. Basically, identify how you would conduct operations during the option years to ensure a smooth transition to the next vendor or into the next contract.

Q52 - 8.2 Department of Defense (DOD) Directive 8500.1 - Is there significance that the term “service provider” is used instead of contractor in this one paragraph?

A52 - The service provider covers anyone providing the service for the vendor, such as, contract, subcontractor, partners, etc.

Q53 - Section L - 6.2 Volume IV Organization - Will the Govt accept a service catalog approach to the port pricing?

A53 - No, per port basis is the method of pricing.

Ref Section M (Q54-Q55) Q54 - Subfactor 2 Supportability - 2c indicates a requirement to respond in no less than 1 hour however the SOO never makes such a statement, what are the parameters of a valid response? A54 - The response time to be on site is two hours. This section will be corrected.

Q55 - Subfactor 3 Cost/Price - The Government’s DLCC price evaluation appears to be limited to only the maintenance unit price per month. How does the Government plan to evaluate the port pricing elements?

A55 - The government will measure by the per port unit price.

Q56 - Attachment J-1 Maintenance Hardware Lists(Excel) CONUS and OCONUS - Do you plan to provide the “as-is” design documentation for the systems listed in Attachment J-1 in this RFP?

A56 - The equipment list is a representative list. The list may or may not change until award. However, all equipment on the final list will be in an operational state when added to maintenance. If you have any questions on the supportability of equipment from original equipment manufacturer provide no pricing and annotate the issue in the notes section.

Q57 - Our team would like to present a question in relationship to the cost model that has been described in the RFP. While most vendors may have the ability to provide price per port for Switching/Routing, this does not include next generation Security architectures which are not based on ports. Secure SSL VPN, NAC, next generation virtual FW/VPN/IPS security service appliances and network management to support all the infrastructure are not port based. This is either connection, user license or bandwidth based solutions. DISA’s direction is to move towards a Cloud Based Model and clearly they must understand that next generation shared resource appliances are the only way to scale and deliver on demand services. Please clarify how you would like for the vendor community to respond to these platforms.

A57 - The government understands the issue related to appliances and will be releasing a modification to the RFP to include a different Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) structure associated with appliances.

Q58 - We have been notified that Netconn Solutions who holds the current Computing Services Design and Engineering Support Services Contract has elected to pursue the HC1028-10-R-2039 program on several teams. In their current role as the Engineering arm of Computing Services, Netconn receives proprietary pricing, design and technology capabilities information which places them in clear conflict of interest for pursuing this contract. It would be better served to have them recues themselves from pursuing this program or have Computing Service take action to remove them from competition.

A58 - No contract like this one for communications exists in DISA and therefore no pricing on capacity service communications exists. It is true that Netconn Solutions does perform on other contracts at DISA, however, no contractor including Netconn Solutions has had any knowledge or input into this requirement. Netconn Solutions is the incumbent for the technical services and Proximity-Sensitive Session-Support Services (PS4), but as incumbents they would not be privy to pricing for the capacity services since this is a new requirement. Netconn Solutions has knowledge of DISA’s infrastructure but by including the equipment list in the RFP, all vendors have the same knowledge of the equipment requiring maintenance, and therefore no vendor should be considered having a conflict of interest in pursuing this contract.

Q59 - Does the government anticipate specifying a DPAS rating for this contract? If so, what is the rating?

A59 - The information is now stated in Block 1 of RFP; DO S10.

Ref Section M, evaluation factors, Factor 1, subfactor 2c references the offeror’s plan to ensure a response time no longer than 1 hour in the event of a crisis. (Q60-Q62) Q60 - Is it up to the offeror to define what constitutes a “crisis”?

A60 - The response time will be changed to 2 hours and the word “crisis” will be removed.

Q61 - Is it up to the offeror to price “crisis” events?

A61 - N/A, based on A60.

Q62 - Where is crisis response referenced in the SOO?

A62 - N/A, based on A60.

Q63 - The evaluation of Section 2f includes “The adequacy and soundness of the offeror’s plan to use performance and network management tools, including software based solutions such as Alterpoint or equivalent software solutions.” The SOO makes clear that the offer is to provide this capability for DISA to use as the operator of the communications service after acceptance. It is our understanding that DISA will manage the equipment through its existing CCCs. If this is the case, can the evaluation factor be changed to read ”The adequacy and soundness of the offeror’s plan to provide performance and network management tools, including software based solutions such as Alterpoint or equivalent software solutions”.

A63 - Yes, the evaluation will be changed to read “The adequacy and soundness of the offeror’s plan to provide performance and network management tools, including software based solutions such as Alterpoint or equivalent software solutions.”

Q64 - SOO 3.2.2.5 - Is it the government’s intention to acquire software and the necessary professional services to install and configure the software? If so, how?

A64 - The software and professional services should be embedded in the port rate.

Q65 - SOO 3.2.2.5 - Our understanding is that other contractors under other contracts perform central management of equipment. The successful offeror of this contract would only provide the equipment/software that has the central management capabilities; it would not provide the actual central management. Please confirm that this understanding is correct.

A65 - That is correct.

Q66 - SOO 3.3.1 - Would you please explain the workflow process in which the COR accepts the order for new equipment. It is our understanding that the COR would place the order with the offeror rather than accept the order.

A66 - The Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will submit a requirement to the vendor with a call order. The vendor will provide a solution to this requirement. The government will either accept or reject the solution. If the solution is accepted, the finalized call order will be placed with the vendor against the contract.

Q67 - SOO Response - Will the response to the SOO be incorporated into the awarded contract?

A67 - The response to the SOO will be the PWS and will be included in the contract.

Q68 - If an offeror or offeror’s teammate has a potential OCI, should an OCI mitigation plan be submitted with the proposal in Volume V.

A68 - No offeror or offeror’s teammate exists as a potential OCI. No contract like this one for communications exists in DISA and therefore no pricing on capacity service communications exists. No contractor at DISA has had any knowledge or input into this requirement. Since an equipment list is included in the RFP, all vendors have the same knowledge of the equipment requiring maintenance, and therefore no vendor should be considered having a conflict of interest in pursuing this contract.

Q69 - DISA-CSD used oral presentations as a component of the acquisition process for the other capacity services contracts. We feel this would be beneficial in the evaluation process. Would DISA consider adding orals to the acquisition as an evaluated component?

A69 - No, we will not consider oral presentations. Oral presentations allowed in the past were used for informational purposes and were not evaluated.

Ref SOO (Q70-Q74) Q70 - Section 2.0 - Will the government allow re-use of existing cabinets/racks/cabling when replacing existing infrastructure via technical refresh or must (only) new cabinets/rack/cabling be used for all CSC infrastructure?

A70 - The vendor must provide new racks, cabinets and power cables when replacing infrastructure.

Q71 - If new cabinets/racks/cabling must be used for CSC infrastructure provided, will the government provide power, power extensions, etc. as required. If so what are the standard or anticipated timeframes for such activity?

A71 - Power will be provided to the Power Distribution Units (PDUs) in the racks. This equipment should be in place.

Q72 - Section 3.0 - Will the government provide space (inclusive of power, rack, etc.) to accommodate server based infrastructure as required for the network management and infrastructure on DISA premise.

A72 - Yes, the government will provide physical space for any devices that are part of the vendors’ solution.

Q73 - Section 3.2 - Will the government maintain chain of custody and processing of DRMO procedures of GFE upon de-installation?

A73 - Yes, the existing government owned equipment will follow the normal Defense Reutilization and Marketing Office (DRMO) process.

Q74 - Section 6.2.5 - Will the government define what constitutes as move and/or first move?

A74 - Movement is defined as the transfer of equipment within the same DISA site and from one DISA site to another DISA site within CONUS. The first move will be free.

Ref Section C (Q75-Q78)

Q75 - Section C 3.2.1 for network management software which may require major release upgrades, for example, 1.0 to 2.0, which includes new features, can the service provider charge a software CLIN fee to upgrade?

A75 - No, this should be incorporated into your price.

Q76 - Section 2.0 Purpose and Section C Descriptions Sections 3 Scope. Define what the Government means by “operational control”.

A76 - Operational control is defined as the level of operational management a vendor needs to deliver their solution specifically related to any tools/software a vendor provides as part of their solution.

Q77 - Can we impose the minimum port configuration?

A77 - The modification to the RFP will further define port configuration as it relates to speed.

Q78 - Does existing hardware equipment at the DECC transfer title to the contractor?

A78 - Government equipment will not be transferred.

Ref Topic - The government desires to receive a per port price for three classes of devices, switches, routers and security devices. (Q79-Q81) Q79 - Can the government provide further technical clarification on the definition of a port?

A79 - For the purposes of this contract a port is a physical interface found on network devices such as a switch or router measured at either 1 Gbps or 10 Gbps. This interface is used to connect servers, uplinks, and network attached devices.

Q80 - Can the government provide more technical details as to what devices would be considered security devices (as in not a router or switch).

A80 - The definition of Category 3 is being modified to cover appliances. The modification to the RFP will describe appliances more specifically.

Q81 - Is the government willing to accept a metric that allows variable port costs based on architecture? (For example, core switches are typically more expensive then access or distribution switches but often contain significantly lower port densities. Switches can be placed in the core, distribution or access layers of the datacenter and the ability to glean a per port cost for a generic switch without knowing its use (core, access or distribution) is difficult.)

A81 - The modification to the RFP contain further breakouts of Category 1 and Category 2 into tiers. The tiers will be based on the function of the switch or router as well as the speed of the ports.

Q82 - Does CSD have regulations and/or procedures governing asset depreciation and buyback values of equipment at contract termination? If there are asset assumptions, please inform us of these terms.

A82 - We will not be buying the equipment at any point. The purpose of this contract for Capacity Services is to eliminate the amount of equipment the government owns and all the cost related to ownership of equipment.

Q83 - The RFP describes the Refresh program as replacing the oldest communications equipment at the rate of 20% each year. Does this mean the oldest 20% of all communications equipment? Conversely, does this mean 20% of the oldest (and undefined) quantity of equipment? If the refresh will not replace 20% of all equipment, can we get a sense of the annual refresh rate of the program in total numbers? Without knowing how much equipment is defined as old, the refresh rate could be as low as $1, or as high as 20% of the total CSD inventory.

A83 - The 20% refresh rate is based the total communication inventory. The idea is to replace all communications equipment over a 5 year period. However, the government will take into consideration other factors like available funding, customer impact and end of life of existing equipment when placing orders to refresh the existing equipment.

Q84 - Within the context of the refresh program, can the bidders be certain that the government will not be refreshing newly purchased equipment under this deal until all of the older equipment is first replaced? Our concern would be the need to amortize the cost of the equipment we buy on behalf of the government, then watching it be replaced before leases are retired and older equipment stays in place.

A84 - The government cannot commit to replacing ALL government owned equipment before replacing any equipment provided under this contract. However, the intent of this contract is to maintain a technically up-to-date communications infrastructure.

Q85 - How does the government define a "port"? For the purposes of a billing model, will the government be willing to recognize the technical (and pricing) differences between 1 gig ports, virtual ports, 10 gig ports, core switch ports, and access layer ports? As two different ports are not created equal, and have vastly different cost points, can the bidder break down port prices into a few small but manageable categories?

A85 - The modification to the RFP will contain further breakouts of Category 1 and Category 2 into tiers. The tiers will be based on the function of the switch or router as well as the speed of the ports.

Ref SOO - There appears to be inconsistencies in how tech refresh is addressed, specifically in SOO paragraphs 3.2, 3.2.2.2, 3.2.2.3, and 3.3.

Q86 - Does the government intend to follow the 20% per year replacement formula specified in Paragraph 3.2, or does the government intend for the CSC vendor to work within the options and flexibility that appear to be intended by Paragraphs 3.2.2.2, 3.2.2.3, 3.2.2.4, and 3.3?

A86 - The replacement of government owned environment by vendor owned environment will happen through the life of the contract. The 20% per year was an government estimate based on available funding. However, the government will consider alternative plans if the winning vendor outlines a more aggressive plan that fits into the available funding.

Paragraph 3.2, “DISA estimates the Tech Refresh Program will replace the oldest communication equipment at a rate of 20% per year.”

Paragraph 3.2.2, Industry Standards, “Implementation of components of the Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) will improve overall management of DISA’s communication infrastructure. Companies and Government agencies that have followed the methodologies of these models have improved their service and the reliability of their communication infrastructure and reduced their long-term costs. DISA has always had a technical refresh program of some level, however, the Government is now requesting contractors propose a solution that will implement an all inclusive schedule.”

Paragraph 3.2.2.2, Configuration Management, “An established process for managing the infrastructure’s communication configuration shall be developed by the contractor and included in the tech refresh program plan. One method to reduce the cost of Configuration Management which the Government strongly supports, but is open to other ideas, is to reduce the types of hardware. Maintaining the configurations over the eight year period with fewer types of hardware will aid in reducing the overall complexity of the infrastructure. DISA expects this to consequently reduce the number of hardware failures and trouble tickets because less time will be spent on issue resolution.”

Paragraph 3.2.2.3, Release Management, “DISA plans to replace old communications equipment within the first year of the contract and then redeploying it to other DISA sites that have older equipment.”

Paragraph 3.3, New Acquisitions, “The Government reserves the right to incorporate any new communication technology and/or equipment within DISA's current or future inventory into the resultant contract(s) if it is deemed to be in the Government's best interest to do so. The government seeks a solution that provides the capability and flexibility to order any future “state of the art” technology.”

Q87 - Section C, Para 3.2.2.1 - These sections refer to a “tech refresh plan” and a “tech refresh program plan”. Where in the proposal is this plan supposed to be provided, and what is the page count allocated to this plan?

A87 - This is included in the 50 page limit.

Q88 - Section C, Para 5.4, Page 80/Para 5.8, Page 81/Para 8.2 - Based on our reading of DoD Directive 8500.1, we have the following questions: Is JITC certification required for the implementation of the solutions we are bidding for CLINs 1, 2, and 3? Is FIPS 140-2 required for VPN devices?

A88 - The equipment must be capable of meeting JITC interoperability requirements when included in new information system packages being presented to JITC for certification. FIPS 140-2 compliance is required for Virtual Private Network (VPN) devices.

Q89 - Section G, 52.209-9000 - Do the various network design and engineering companies that support DISA CSD have an OCI issue?

A89 - No contract like this one for communications exists in DISA and therefore no pricing on capacity service communications exists. No contractor at DISA has had any knowledge or input into this requirement. Since an equipment list is included in the RFP, all vendors have the same knowledge of the equipment requiring maintenance, and therefore no vendor should be considered having a conflict of interest in pursuing this contract.

Q90 - Section G, 52.219-1 - The NAICS Code for this opportunity is 541519, which states: The small business size standard for a concern which submits an offer in its own name, other than on a construction or service contract, but which proposes to furnish a product which it did not itself manufacture, is 500 employees. Since this is a services contract, the 500 employees size standard does not apply, correct? The only applicable size standard is $25M, correct?

A90 - Correct, the applicable size standard is $25M.

Q91 - Section L, Para 3.2 - Does the master Table of Contents in the Executive Summary count towards the page limit for that Volume?

A91 - Yes Q92 - Section L, Para 7.1 - Volume V calls for a signed copy of the solicitation and completion of sections A through K. Subsequent paragraphs refer to only Sections A, B, F, G, H, I, and K. Is the Contractor to include only those Sections that require a response, or should Sections C, D, E, and J be included as well?

A92 - The list in Volume V is a checklist of required documents. Only documents requiring a response need to be submitted and should be submitted in their corresponding Volume, i.e. Price List should be included in Volume IV. Submissions should not be duplicated. See RFP, pg 1, Block 11 for applicable sections.

Q93 - Section L, Para 7.3.3 - Para 7.3.3 lists items to be submitted in Volume V. Included in this list is Past Performance Information Sheets. Volume III is the Past Performance volume. Are we required to submit the Past Performance Information Sheets in both volumes?

A93 - Past Performance is Volume III and therefore only necessary to be included in Volume III.

Q94 - Section L, Para 7.3.3 - Para 7.3.3 lists required submittals in Volume V. Included in this list is Section 508—Offeror Certification. 508 certification is not discussed anywhere else in the RFP. Specifically, what 508 certifications are required to be submitted?

A94 - An exception applies to the 508; therefore the Section 508 is not applicable.

Q95 - Section L, Para 7.3.3 - Required Submittals are listed under Volume VI. Should the QASP, Section 508, and other certifications be included in this volume?

A95 - Required submittals should be submitted in their associated Volume. The QASP is not provided by the vendor and Section 508 is no longer required since is now labeled as “Not Applicable.”

Q96 - Section M - Is the Executive Summary evaluated? If so, what are the evaluation criteria?

A96 - Yes, the executive summary will be evaluated under technical/management.

Q97 - Attachment L-4 - Our assumption is that Past Performance questionnaires are due at the time of proposal submittal. Please confirm.

A97 - Yes Q98 - Attachment J-1 - What security or non-security benefits does DISA gain by utilizing the ClearCube C/Port technology?

A98 - This is not an issue related to this acquisition. This is just to notify the vendor that they may have to maintain ClearCube.

Q99 - The RFP does not include a Section D. Is the Contractor to assume that Section D is excluded entirely?

A99 - Section D is not required. The equipment is vendor owned; thus Commercial vendor standards will apply.

Q100 - What are the Visara thin clients attached to? What functionality are these providing? What type of network adapter is required?

A100 - The Visara appliances are used to provide out-of-band, thin client access to mainframe devices. They support 3270, COAX, ESCON, Local Channel, Token Ring, RS232, V.35 and/or Ethernet connections. The primary connection type in use today is Ethernet.

Q101 - Some network vendors implement and sell propriety protocols to provide functionality that delivers short-term benefits to users, which result in locking customers into a single vendor environment for the long term. Other network vendors work with standards bodies to provide new functionality via industry standard protocols, which are implemented across multiple vendors’ platforms. This open systems approach delivers the same beneficial functionality and the long-term benefit of not being locked into a single vendor platform.

Will DISA allow us to provide network solutions that leverage proprietary protocols? What is DISA’s preferred Layer 2 protocol? Is Spanning Tree the only acceptable solution or will you accept proprietary Layer 2 switching protocols?

A101 - The Government prefers to use standards-based protocols whenever possible. However, there are occasions in which the benefits and/or capabilities provided using proprietary protocols outweigh the benefits/capabilities provided from their open standards based counterparts. At this time, the Government’s preferred layer 2 protocols are Ethernet and Spanning Tree, as the additional benefits received from proprietary options are not substantial enough to move us from the open standards approach.