UCR_RFI_Response_Template_28_JUL_2026.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 48 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 612673989-001
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This is a standardized response template for the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Unified Capabilities Requirements (UCR) Request for Information (RFI). The template is designed to collect industry input on proposed interoperability requirements for Department of Defense (DoD) Unified Capabilities technologies, specifically Voice, Video, Chat, and Data/SDN functional areas. Respondents are required to complete all applicable tabs in the Excel workbook, which include respondent identification information, UCR comments on proposed capability updates, and optional gaps and observations for government consideration during UCR modernization planning.
The response template requires vendors to provide capability-based, vendor-neutral feedback focused on industry standards, architectures, and approaches rather than proprietary solutions. Respondents must identify their company name, point of contact details, company UEI, CAGE code, and DFARS size classification in Tab 2. Tab 3 requires respondents to document proposed revisions to interoperability requirements, identify applicable enterprise services, and reference relevant industry standards or RFCs. Tab 4 allows optional submission of strategic gaps, risks, and observations related to UC interoperability across multiple functional areas. All submissions must exclude proprietary, classified, competition-sensitive, cybersecurity, and Quality of Service requirements. The government explicitly notes that participation in this RFI does not constitute a commitment to issue a solicitation or award a contract.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| DISA SD-WAN Interoperability Requirements Comprehensive.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DISA Interoperability Requirements - Chat.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DISA Interoperability Requirements - Voice.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DISA Interoperability Requirements - Video.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| UCR RFI_August 2026.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Data Inputs
| DFARS Company Size Classification | Current Operational Relevance | |||||||||
| (How relevant is this section to today’s operational and mission needs?) | Modernization Priority | |||||||||
| (How should this section be treated in an updated UCR?) | Technology Alignment | |||||||||
| (How well does this section align with current and emerging technologies (e.g., cloud, zero trust, 5G, AI, automation, etc.?) | Commercial Service or Capability | |||||||||
| (Select: Yes or No; if Yes, enter the service or capability name in the Service or Capability Name column.) | Integration or Interoperability Challenges | |||||||||
| (Are there any integration or interoperability challenges, such as impacts to system integration, interfaces, data exchange, dependencies, or existing services?) | DoW Service or Capability Utalization | |||||||||
| (Select: Select Yes or No; if Yes, select the DoW organization name in the service/capability provided to DoW organization.) | Services/Capabilities Provided to DoW Organization | |||||||||
| (If applicable, select ther current Department of War (DoW) customer that your company is provideing a service/capability to.) | Category Type | |||||||||
| (Select: Gap/Risk/Observation) | Capability Coverage Status | |||||||||
| U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) | Gap | Fully Provided | ||||||||
| Small Business (SB) | 1 – Obsolete: No longer relevant | 1 – Remove: Should be deprecated | 1 – Misaligned | Yes | Yes | Yes | U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) | Risk | Partially Provided | |
| Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) | 2 – Low: Limited relevance; niche or declining use | 2 – Consolidate: Overlaps with other sections | 3 – Partially aligned | No | No | No | U.S. European Command (EUCOM) | Dependency | Not Provided | |
| Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) | 3 – Moderate: Still applicable but not mission-critical | 3 – Major revision: Core intent valid, but content outdated | 5 – Fully aligned | U.S. Indo-Pacific Command (INDOPACOM) | Observation | Planned / In Development | ||||
| Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) | 4 – High: Important and frequently applied | 4 – Minor updates: Terminology or light refresh needed | U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) | Unknown | ||||||
| Historically Underutilized Business Zone (HUBZone) Small Business | 5 – Critical: Essential today; directly supports current ops | 5 – Retain as-is: Still accurate and sufficient | U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) | |||||||
| Large Business | U.S. Space Command (SPACECOM) | |||||||||
| U.S. Cyber Command (USCYBERCOM) | ||||||||||
| U.S. Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) | ||||||||||
| U.S. Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) | ||||||||||
| U.S. Transportation Command (USTRANSCOM) | ||||||||||
| Department of the Army: Includes Regular Army, Army National Guard, Army Reserve | ||||||||||
| Department of the Navy: Includes Navy, Marine Corps (and Coast Guard during wartime) | ||||||||||
| Department of the Air Force: Includes Air Force, Space Force, Air Force Reserve, Air National Guard | ||||||||||
| Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (A&S) | ||||||||||
| Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence and Security (I&S) | ||||||||||
| Under Secretary of Defense for Policy | ||||||||||
| Under Secretary of Defense (Comptroller) / Chief Financial Officer | ||||||||||
| Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness | ||||||||||
| Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering | ||||||||||
| Joint Chiefs of Staff (JS) | ||||||||||
| National Guard Bureau (NGB) | ||||||||||
| Office of the Inspector General | ||||||||||
| Defense Media Activity (DMA) | ||||||||||
| DoD Education Activity (DoDEA) | ||||||||||
| Washington Headquarters Services (WHS) | ||||||||||
| Missile Defense Agency (MDA) | ||||||||||
| Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) | ||||||||||
| Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) | ||||||||||
| Defense Health Agency (DHA) | ||||||||||
| Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) | ||||||||||
| National Security Agency (NSA) | ||||||||||
| Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) |
https://www.nationalguard.mil/https://www.norad.mil/https://www.war.gov/ Tab 1 - Instructions
TAB 1: RFI RESPONSE INSTRUCTIONS (READ FIRST)
| Workbook/Response Template Purpose: |
| This workbook serves as the standardized response template for the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Unified Capabilities Requirements (UCR) Request for Information (RFI). Information submitted in response to this RFI will be used to support DISA UCR effort planning. |
Information provided in this workbook will be reviewed and analyzed by the Government to support UCR assessment, prioritization, and modernization planning. Respondent inputs will be mapped to UCR functional areas, where applicable, to enable traceability, comparative analysis, and identification of cross-cutting gaps, risks, and integration or interoperability considerations.
Submission of responses does not obligate the Government to pursue any specific approach, capability, or acquisition strategy.
| General Instructions: |
| • Complete all applicable and required tabs in this Excel workbook/response template. |
| • Follow the tab-specific instructions provided at the top of each worksheet (indicated in purple). |
| • Instructions describe the purpose of each tab, the expected response format, and general guidance to ensure submissions are consistent, traceable, and suitable for Government review. |
| • Provide capability-based, vendor-neutral responses. |
| • Do not include proprietary, classified, or competition-sensitive information. |
| Workbook Structure: |
| • Tab 1 – RFI Response Instructions: This tab provides instructions for completing the Government-provided Excel workbook/response template. Respondents should review the instructions in this tab prior to completing the remaining tabs. |
| • Tab 2 – Respondent Information (Required): Identify the responding company and primary points of contact (POC). |
| • Tab 3 –UCR Comments (Required): Provide details regarding any industry standards, Requests for Comment (RFC), and/or other requirements with supporting rationale for updates to draft requirements or new proposed requirements. For existing documents or references in different formats, please identify the document/artifact name, and include as attachments in response to the RFI. |
| • Tab 4 – Gaps and Observations (Optional): We request your detailed recommendations for revising the attached Draft UC interoperability requirements. Please provide specific gaps, risks, and observations for evaluation of suggested mitigation or adjudication for inclusion. Your review should evaluate the overall approach to estabilishing and evaluationg the requirements and provide supporting rationale for all proposed changes. Specifically, please focus your analysis on identifying: potential implementation and validation gaps, or suggestions for future UC interoperability requirement categories, and process-related risks or challenges. |
| Submission Guidance: |
| • Responses should focus on standards, architectures, and approaches rather than specific vendor offerings. |
| • Responses should be internally consistent across all tabs and aligned with the assumptions reflected in functional area rankings and narrative inputs. |
| • Participation in this RFI is voluntary and does not constitute a commitment by the Government to issue a solicitation or award a contract. |
&"-,Bold" DOD UNIFIED CAPABILITIES REQUIREMENT (UCR) DOCUMENT
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) &KFF0000#TBD &K01+000
&"-,Bold"Page &P of &N
Tab 2 - Respondent Info
TAB 2: RESPONDENT INFORMATION (REQUIRED)
INSTRUCTIONS:
• Enter respondent information in all fields indicated in below.
• Provide the name of the organization, primary point of contact (POC), title, email, and phone number, as applicable.
• Information submitted in this tab will be used solely for RFI administration, traceability, and follow-up clarification purposes and will not be shared outside of Government personnel supporting this RFI.
| Company Name: | Enter Company Name |
| Point of Contact (POC) Information: | |
| Name: | Enter POC Name |
| Title: | Enter POC Title |
| Email: | Enter POC Email Address |
| Phone Number: | Enter POC Phone Number |
| Company Unique Entity Identifier (UEI): | Enter Company UEI |
| Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code: | Enter Company CAGE Code |
| DFARS Company Size Classification: | Select Option |
| Date Submitted (MM-DD-YYY): | MM-DD-YYYY |
&"-,Bold" DOD UNIFIED CAPABILITIES REQUIREMENT (UCR) DOCUMENT
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) &KFF0000#TBD
&"-,Bold"Page &P of &N
Tab 3 - UCR Comments
TAB 3: UNIFIED CAPABILITY REQUIREMENTS (UCR) COMMENTS (REQUIRED)
INSTRUCTIONS:
This tab allows respondents to document their responses to the proposed UC interoperability requirements as shown in the interoperability requirements worksheets shared with this RFI. Input from this section will inform Government analysis related to current state, modernization, consolidation, and alignment of capabilities with current and emerging technologies.
• Complete one row per proposed revision to a particular shared interoperability requirement or per new proposed requirement.
• In Industry Comment column:
◦Propose new or revised capability area for the new proposed requirement that is not fully represented in the current draft requirements presented by the government in this RFI.
◦ Identify current UC related enterprise services (DoD or commercial) that supports the new proposed requirement.
◦ Indicate "No Enterprise Service Exists" when no enterprise service currently exists for a specific new proposed requirement and associated capability area.
◦Identify new industry standard or Request For Comment (RFC) requirement applicable to current draft requirement or new proposed requirement.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
• Respondents may reference existing UCR2013R2 functional areas or propose new capability groups, as appropriate.
• Bundling recommendations should be based on demonstrated technology convergence, shared infrastructure, or operational efficiencies
• Respondents are encouraged to focus on how UC interoperability requirements should be structured in a modernized UCR rather than restating the current framework.
• In accordance with DoW CIO Memorandum, DoD Information Network Approved Products List, 18 July 2025 and the DoDIN Approved Products List Sunset FAQ, 30 September 2025 UC interoperability requirements, only, are the focus of the UCR update. Please do not include in your response any cybersecurity or Quality of Service (QoS) related requirements.
| GOVERNMENT PROVIDED EXAMPLE RESPONSE | |
| Number | Category |
(Voice, Video,
| Chat, Data/SDN) | Group ID | Rule ID | SRG ID | Severity Change | Classification Change | Rule Title Edit | Discussion Edit | Notes Edit | Check Text Edit | Fix Text Edit | Note Edit | References Edit | Industry Comment |
| Voice | Signaling | 0000100 | High | Unknown | The SC (as may be implemented by a SBC and Policy Switch Router) must be SIPconnect 2.0 compliant with certification via the SIP Forums "SIPconnect Certification Testing Program". The SC must use SIPconnect compliant signaling mechanisms for session interoperability unless otherwise specified by appropriate STIGs, policy, or the requirements herein. | The SIP Connect 2.0 profile provides an open standard and suitable core signaling architecture necessary for progressive interoperability. All necessary signaling mechanisms required to facilitate routine Voice Over IP calls are defined and the requirements herein serve to extend functionality of SIP Connect to support Military Unique Features. | Within this solution, 'Session Controller (SC)' is a logical role fulfilled by the combined operation of Session Border Controllers (SBC) and PSX Policy Server | 1. Obtain the certification Test Plan V. 1.1.0: https://www.sipforum.org/download/sipconnect-certification-test-plan-v1-0-pdf/?wpdmdl=2751 |
2. SIP testing tool is available at: https://www.iol.unh.edu/testing/ip/sip/sipconnect/tool
3. Test compliance
| 4. Record pass/fail. | SIPconnect, SIP Forum | New requirement for the Acme solution NO ENTERPRISE SERVICE EXISTS. | |||||||||||
| 10 | Chat | Use a supported Teams DoW interop architecture | High | Unknown | The interop design shall terminate SIP-SIMPLE on a gateway and use Teams-supported DoW surfaces on the Teams side, such as Microsoft Graph v1.0 and/or a custom Teams bot/app. The design shall not treat Teams DoW as a generic SIP-SIMPLE peer. The design shall meet all interoperability requirements for Impacts Level 4 and 5 traffic originating in DoW cloud. | Avoids an unsupported direct SIP-SIMPLE federation design and establishes where protocol translation, attribution, queuing, and policy enforcement occur. | This is a gating architecture test, not a user-feature test. | Attempt to deliver a SIP MESSAGE directly from the commercial SIP-SIMPLE system to Teams DoW SIP/voice endpoints, then deliver the same text through the interop gateway using the approved Teams-side API/app. | Direct SIP-SIMPLE chat delivery is not accepted as an interop path. Gateway-mediated delivery succeeds. Tolerance: zero production chat messages delivered directly through Teams Direct Routing, SIP Gateway, or third-party SIP proxy paths. | This is a gating architecture test, not a user-feature test. | https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftteams/devices/sip-gateway-plan |
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftteams/direct-routing-plan https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftteams/microsoft-teams-online-call-flows https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoftteams/platform/concepts/cloud-overview https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/graph/api/chatmessage-post?view=graph-rest-1.0
RESPONDENT UNIFIED CAPABILITIES REQUIREMENT COMMENTS
Number Category (Voice, Video, Chat, Data/SDN) Group ID Rule ID SRG ID Severity Change Classification Change Rule Title Edit Discussion Edit Notes Edit Check Text Edit Fix Text Edit Note Edit References Edit Industry Comment
Tab 4 - Gaps & Observations
TAB 4: GAPS, RISKS, AND OBSERVATIONS (OPTIONAL)
INSTRUCTIONS:
This tab provides respondents the opportunity to identify additional gaps, risks, or high-level observations not otherwise captured in Tab 3: UCR and Tab:4 Process that Government should consider as we update the Unified Capabilities Requirements (UCR).
• The Government has provided an example (highlighted in orange in the table below) to demonstrate the expected format for respondent inputs.
• Inputs shall be non-proprietary, concise, and directly relevant to UCR modernization, sustainment, integration, interoperability, policy alignment, or emerging technology considerations.
• Responses should focus on strategic or cross-cutting issues rather than solution-specific implementations.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
• Respondents should avoid duplicating information already provided in Tab 3: UCR Comments.
• Inputs on this tab should address cross-cutting, enterprise-level considerations that impact multiple UCR functional areas.
• Observations should focus on gaps, risks, dependencies, or modernization implications not adequately addressed within existing the draft UC interoperability requirements.
• Responses should be framed at a strategic level and should not propose specific vendor solutions, architectures, or proprietary approaches.
• Where applicable, respondents may identify policy, governance, or standards-related considerations that could influence future UCR updates.
GOVERNMENT PROVIDED EXAMPLE RESPONSE
| Category Type | |
| (Select: Gap/Risk/Observation) | Description of Gap, Risk, or Observation |
| (Provide a Concise Description of the Issue or Consideration) | Currently within the UCR |
| (Select: Yes/No. If Yes, Identify Functional Area Impacted) | UCR Functional Area Impacted |
| (Select the Applicable UCR Functional Area/Section Impacted) | Recommendations or Mitigation |
(Provide Recommended Actions, Considerations, or Mitigation Approaches for Government Consideration)
| Gap | Current UCR does not fully address integration and interoperability of commercial and cloud-based voice solutions, including mobile and unified communication platforms. This gap may impact adoption, scalability, and secure data exchange with existing DoD systems. The gap may affect alignment with enterprise standards and architectures, interfaces, and data exchange with existing DoD systems. Challenges include ensuring secure, reliable interoperability with joint, coalition, or mission partner systems, as well as dependencies on legacy voice platforms. (EXAMPLE) | No | Consider updating the UCR to include commercial and cloud-based voice solutions, including mobile and unified communication capabilities. Encourage adoption of common standards and architectures, support secure interoperability with joint/coalition partners, and provide guidance for phased integration with existing DoD systems. Evaluate scalability, redundancy, and modernization approaches to improve capability delivery and reduce operational risk. | |
| Risk | The current UCR does not fully support specialized public safety voice features, such as priority calling, emergency alerting, or direct dispatch integration. This limitation may impact mission-critical communications during emergencies and reduce interoperability with first responder systems. (EXAMPLE) | Yes | Public Safety Voice Features | Update the UCR to explicitly include public safety voice features, including priority calling, emergency alerting, and dispatch integration. Encourage alignment with standards for mission-critical communications and interoperability with first responder networks. Implement phased integration strategies to maintain continuity of service and evaluate modernization options to support secure, scalable, and resilient emergency communications |
RESPONDENT GAPS, RISKS, AND OBSERVATIONS RESPONSE
| Category Type | |
| (Select: Gap/Risk/Observation) | Description of Gap, Risk, or Observation |
| (Provide a Concise Description of the Recommendation, Issue, or Consideration) | Currently within the UCR |
| (Select: Yes/No. If Yes, Identify Functional Area Impacted) | UCR Functional Area Impacted |
| (Select the Applicable UCR Functional Area / Section Impacted) | Recommendations or Mitigation |
(Provide Recommended Actions, Considerations, or Mitigation Approaches for Government Consideration)
&"-,Bold" DOD UNIFIED CAPABILITIES REQUIREMENT (UCR) DOCUMENT
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) &KFF0000#TBD
&"-,Bold"Page &P of &N
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .