Request for Proposals: Wide Area Network Upgrade Project. Response to RFIs/Questions. Updated January 23, 2013

Transcription

1 Request for Proposals: Wide Area Network Upgrade Project Response to RFIs/Questions Updated January 23, 2013 Q1. We are unable to locate one of the sites listed under the elementary schools to be served. Could you please verify the address for this site: PA 40 Elementary (K-6); 355 Rush Lily, Irvine CA A. The address for this site is correct. However, the area has not been developed yet and therefore the streets are not yet reflected in currently available online or traditional maps. Please see documentation on the RFP site for a map with approximate locations for future schools. Q2. We could not find this address (355 Rush Lily). Is this a new school? When will it open? Is this the correct address? A. PA 40 ES is a new school. The school is scheduled to open in the fall of The address is correct, but does not yet appear on conventional map sources. Please see documentation on the RFP site for a map with approximate locations for future schools. Q3. Can the District provide locations for the future sites? A. Locations are subject to change. However, anticipated school site locations are included in the map now posted to the IUSD WAN RFP website. Q4. According to section 4.1.3, 4.4.1, and IUSD has described two scenarios and requested two proposed solutions/options: (a) the provisioning of WAN services with a providermanaged router, or (b) the provisioning of WAN services with a provider-owned, clientconfigured router. Regarding option b., please provide more detail related to IUSD's expectations for long-term management of the edge router post transition? What level of access to the router does IUSD anticipate needing for this option? A. The district has the trained and certified staff to configure an edge router. The District will need enabled administrative access to configure and modify configurations based on changes and services that are required on the Local Area Network (examples: adding/removing IP schemes, static routes, shaping). Q5. Does the District currently own or lease the WAN equipment (switches/routers) at each site? If the equipment is leased, is it offered as part of a bundled service from your current provider? If the equipment is district-owned: 1

2 a. Can you provide additional detail regarding the equipment specifications? b. Is this equipment under a maintenance contract (i.e. SmartNet)? A. The District owns the WAN router at each site. The existing equipment is irrelevant as they will be replaced under the WAN initiative. Currently, the service provider owns and manages one WAN switch at each remote site (provider configures and manages VLANs on these switches). Q6. According to section the design requested should be of star topology utilizing the appearance of multiple logical point-to-point links capable of passing VLANs using q (we assume you intended 802.1q), furthermore in 5.1.2, with unshared dedicated links for all connections. Please specify the following: Regarding the topology: at what desired bandwidth rate(s), should the WAN unified network hand-off to the IUSD NOC LAN infrastructure be provisioned? A. Desired bandwidth rates have been specified according to site location type (elementary, middle, high, NOC, etc). The hand-off needs to support each point to point connection, as though each link is homerun. Ten gigabit links aggregated to a 5-gig handoff will not be accepted. Each link will be stress tested individually, and simultaneously. Bandwidth rates starts at 500Mbps for elementary and middle school sites to NOC with option to increase to 1Gbps and 10Gbps. Bandwidth rates for high school to NOC starts at 1Gbps with option to increase to 10Gbps. Bandwidth rated for NOC to OCDE starts at 1Gbps with options to increase to 10Gbps, 40Gbps and 100Gbps. Provider will manage and configure VLAN traffic from hand-off to handoff using provider-owned and managed equipment. Q7. Regarding the implementation of VLANS using 802.1q: will IUSD terminate edge site VLAN(s) (using the provider-owned or provider-managed router) at the end site or will all routing be at the IUSD NOC using IUSD equipment? A. The Metro Area Network VLANs between school site and NOC will be managed routed by provider owned\managed equipment. IUSD will manage all Local Area Network VLANs and IP routing between sites using IUSD owned equipment. Q8. According to section The district is requesting throughput from OCDE to the District NOC 1 Gbps initially and 10 Gbps in the future. However, the pricing matrix also request 40Gbps and 100Gbps. Could you please confirm the amounts requested? A. This is correct. Initial bandwidth required from District NOC to OCDE is 1Gbps with option to increase to 10Gbps, 40Gbps and 100Gbps. Q9. Can the two requested solutions/scenarios be clarified? Section 1.2 (Requested Services) does not indicate a provider managed router service. However, Section indicates the first solution should be for a provider-managed router service. The first appears to imply the provider can assist the customer if newer CPE is needed for the customer to interface with the WAN. The later appears to imply a managed router solution. 2

3 3 a. Section 1.2 i. Solution 1: Service terminated as necessary to provide subscribed bandwidth rates. ii. Solution 2: Service provider procures and installs edge routers, District staff configures. b. Section i. Solution 1: WAN services provisioned with provider-managed router. ii. Solution 2: WAN services provisioned with provider-owned and client-configured router. A. Solution one is for services with equipment. This is for a WAN connection with provider managed router providing transparency, and requiring no interaction from client. Solution two is for services with leased equipment. The leased router shall be controlled and configured by District completely. Q10. Is the type of service described in Sections and 5.4 meant to indicate the WAN is preferred to be provided as Layer-2 Ethernet services (such as Metro-Ethernet)? A. The type of service shall appear to the connected Local Area Networks as a logical link. Both scenarios will be acceptable as long as performance parameters and other requirements are met. Q11. Can Section regarding the definition of "unshared dedicated links" for all connections be clarified? A. Unshared dedicated links means that each site has a dedicated bandwidth guaranteed for each site. Provider shall not submit a shared link between sites, or shared with other customers without guaranteed bandwidth for the site's logical connection. Each school site shall be connected independently and not cascaded to other sites with a higher potential of multi-site failure. All connections will be stress tested simultaneously throughout the course of the contract. If the link is found to not be capable of supporting the bandwidth, the District shall take the actions identified as such in the RFP. Q12. Will the Wide Area Network be aggregated at the District Office from the school sites? A. The point of aggregation will be the District s data center. The data center will be located at 100 Nightmist. The new data center is expected to be completed by December Q13. Can the district clarify the two pricing options? A. Solution one is for services, with only the equipment needed by the provider for a hand-off to the district. This is for a WAN connection with a generally provider-managed router. The District must have the ability to access the router to make changes impacting the Local Area Network (e.g., IP scheme, shaping, policies). Solution two is for services with leased equipment. The provider shall lease the router to the District that would otherwise be purchased by the District. The leased router shall be controlled and configured by District completely. Q14. Of the two pricing options, which does the district prefer?

4 A. The District does not have a preferred model at this time. The District will make a determination on which solution is most cost-effective upon receiving the bid responses, and reviewing available pricing on hardware purchased via separate bid or existing State agreement. Q15. What is the incumbent network switch structure? A. Routers are Cisco and will be replaced in conjunction with the WAN upgrade. Switches are Dell and HP. Q16. On Scenario One (carrier-managed option), does the district still require access to the equipment? A. Yes. The District needs to be able to access the equipment to make changes impacting the Local Area Network (e.g., IP scheme, shaping, policies). Q17. Are you presently running any routing protocols on the WAN? A. Yes, at some sites. Q18. Is the current WAN equipment leased? A. No. The current equipment is owned by the District. We anticipate replacing/upgrading all WAN equipment in conjunction with this project. Q19. Are all routers expected to be upgraded? A. Yes, we anticipate upgrading all routers. Q20. Do you have a preference for a copper or fiber hand-off? If fiber, is multi-mode, or singlemode preferred? A. The District would prefer a fiber hand-off. However, copper is acceptable if stated in the RFP Response and if the same level of service is delivered. The district does not have a preference for single-mode or multi-mode fiber. However, the fiber must be able to deliver the required bandwidth. Q21. Do the current HP and Dell switches have the ability to accept a fiber hand-off? A. No, but these switches will be replaced as part of the WAN Upgrade project. Q22. Are you open to the vendor providing layer 2, but not layer 3? Is this permissible, given that the RFP requires pricing on a vendor-provided router? A. Yes. The District will consider the proposal. The district is evaluating Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 costs independently, from the perspective of total cost of ownership to the District. Therefore, any additional equipment the District needs to provide based on the proposed solution will be considered as a cost of the proposal. 4

5 Q23. Do all school sites currently have a layer 3 router? A. Currently, every school has a layer 3 router. Services are provided through ATT s Opteman solution. Traffic is managed thorough VLAN segmentation. Q24. All remote sites will have a connection directly to the NOC (MNO Facility, 100 Nightmist). Will there be future need for a mesh network? A. The need for a mesh network for resiliency is not anticipated at this time, given the district s experience with the reliability of the current WAN and erate regulations that make some resilient services ineligible for reimbursement? Q25. The RFP specifies a bandwidth requirement in excess of 40 Gbps. Is the District open to aggregated 10 Gbps or 1 Gbps connections to meet the bandwidth requirement? A. The District recognizes that some providers may only be able to meet the higher bandwidth requirements by aggregating multiple connections. This may be acceptable; however, the vendor MUST specify this in their proposal with appropriate pricing. In addition, if the vendor must meet the requirement through aggregation now, but has future plans to expand capacity, they may include a true, valid timeline and pricing as of the expansion as well. Q26. Will there be a hardware bid in alignment with this RFP? A. The District expects to begin the hardware procurement process in the Spring or Summer of 2013, either through a separate bid or via existing State purchasing vehicles. Q27. Does the district intend to use the WAN for voice and video traffic? If so, do we need fram sizes of greater than 2,000 MTU? A. Yes, WAN will be used for Voice, Video and Ethernet data traffic. Frame size greater than 2000 MTU is not used. Q28. Are we looking for a diverse path for resiliency into the NOC? A. No, we are not looking for that at this time, due to funding availability and erate regulations. Q29. What about lag/aggregation? Would that also be a violation of the erate regulations? A. It is acceptable to aggregate to meet bandwidth requirements, but not for resiliency. We would consider resiliency to OCDE, but have not planned for it at this time and it is not a requirement of this proposal. Q30. Is there a preference for Cisco equipment? 5

6 A. IUSD does not have a vendor preference for the equipment. Minimum equipment standard should support 1Gbps (fiber interface) connection to hand-off. Future upgrade to 10Gbps connection (fiber interface) may require hardware replacement to accommodate 10Gbps connection. Q31. RFP requires that there is no single point of failure. Does this apply to where school traffic is handed off? A. The Single Point of Failure requirement refers to inside the provider s network (preventing connections to all sites at the District). Q32. Is there a chance to do a site walk? A. The District will schedule a site walk of a few representative sites prior to the close of the RFP. The site walk date will be posted on the RFP website. Q33. Does unshared dedicated links mean the connection is not shared or there is not oversubscription? A. Unshared dedicated links means that each site has a dedicated bandwidth guaranteed for each site. Provider shall not submit a shared link between sites, or shared with other customers without guaranteed bandwidth for the site's logical connection. Each school site shall be connected independently and not cascaded to other sites with a higher potential of multi-site failure. All connections will be stress tested simultaneously throughout the course of the contract. If the link is found to not be capable of supporting the bandwidth, the District shall take the actions identified as such in the RFP. Q34. Could we combine bandwidth for multiple sites, provided that the total guaranteed bandwidth is sufficient for all sites? A. No. Because of the risk of multiple sites being affected by a single outage, the connections must be dedicated. Q35. Are there any issues with the current provider that we should know? What drove the issuance of the RFP? A. The RFP was issued because of the expiration of our current contract for WAN services (July 1, 2014), and because of increased bandwidth needs related to increased technology uses at our schools. In addition, the district is seeking updated pricing. We have had no significant performance issues with our current provider. Q36. Will IUSD publish the sign-in sheet? A. Yes. The sign-in sheet will be posted to the RFP website. Q37. Do providers have the option of transitioning sites gradually? 6

7 A. Yes. It is the District s expectation that the implementation will be phased. Work may begin as early as July 1 st, 2013 (beginning of the erate year). However, sites may not be brought online until after the construction of the new NOC/data center is complete at 100 Nightmist (expected December 2013), and all sites must be online prior to the expiration of the existing contract (June 1, 2014 deadline per the RFP). The RFP requires that vendors develop and submit a project plan, including a prioritized site schedule within 30 days of contract execution. Q38. Would the District be open to working with the provider on the prioritized list of sites? A. Yes. Q39. Would the provider cutover the school while it is being constructed or wait until completion? A. New sites would be brought online after construction was substantially complete. New sites, constructed after the initial period of performance would be incorporated into the agreement through an addendum with a different implementation schedule, but a concurrent contract end date. Q40. Do we have samples of the shop drawings that will be required? A. The District will provide example shop drawings from our facilities departments to the selected provider. Q41. Are bandwidth requirements the same for Elementary, Middle, and High Schools? A. The initial bandwidth requirement differs (500 Mbps for Elementary, 1 Gbps for Secondary). Detailed bandwidth requirements are listed in Appendix B of the RFP. Q42. Does the District prefer to have one provider for both Telecommunications and the WAN? A. No. The District does not have a preference for a single or separate providers. Q43. What is the size of the school district? A. IUSD currently has 29,000 students and is expected to grow to 40,000 by Q44. Is the District moving to Bring Your Own Device? If so, when? A. Yes, IUSD does plan to implement BYOD. The implementation will likely begin in and is contingent on additional funding through a technology bond or other resource. Q45. There will be a fiber connection to the router, then a fiber or Ethernet connection to the network. Are any additional connections required? A. No (other than a standard power connection). 7

8 Q46. Does the District have limitations on the number of rack space units? (E.g., can the provider have 2 U for a NID and router?) A. The District can accommodate reasonable additional rack space. However, rack space requirements beyond 1-2U must be specified in the RFP response. Q47. If the provider has enough space through existing conduit to pull the fiber, but not with innerduct, does the provider need to trench? A. Revised Response: The District s requirement is that the fiber is protected within the conduit. Properly rated innerduct is mandatory; however, it does not need to be a large outside diameter(od) innerduct. It can be a small OD only large enough for the new fiber cabling. Please refer to section of the RFP. If there is not room in the conduit for fiber with innerduct, the contractor must provide new conduit. Q48. Given that a site walk at each site may not be available, does the district have any idea of which sites are likely to require trenching? A. The District will follow up with our Maintenance department. There may be a small number of sites with unfavorable conditions. Q49. If the conduit is in the building, is it owned by the school site or the provider? A. It varies. In some cases, the conduit is owned by the provider via an easement on the school s parcel. Q50. Can someone join us on the site walk to answer construction-related questions? A. The IT team will coordinate with Facilities to have a representative join us for the site walk. Q51. When can construction begin? A. Work may begin as early as July 1 st, 2013 (beginning of the erate year). However, sites may not be brought online until after the construction of the new NOC/data center is complete at 100 Nightmist (expected December 2013), and all sites must be online prior to the expiration of the existing contract (June 1, 2014 deadline per the RFP). The RFP requires that vendors develop and submit a project plan, including a prioritized site schedule within 30 days of contract execution. Q52. Is the switching primarily layer 2? A. Yes. If there is any layer 3, it is passing through the router to the NOC. Q53. Could the District clarify the timeline again? A. Work may begin as early as July 1 st, 2013 (beginning of the erate year). However, sites may not be brought online until after the construction of the new NOC/data center is complete at 100 8

9 Nightmist (expected December 2013), and all sites must be online prior to the expiration of the existing contract (June 1, 2014 deadline per the RFP). The RFP requires that vendors develop and submit a project plan, including a prioritized site schedule within 30 days of contract execution. Q54. Must the work be completed on non-instructional days? How many sites have summer school? A. Work must be completed on non-instruction days or after school hours. Our primary interest is in preserving the safety of our students and uninterrupted access and instruction. We will work with the provider on a reasonable schedule. Summer school occurs at one high school and approximately 1/3 rd of elementary schools. However, summer school does not run through the full summer recess. Q55. For the data center, do you currently have a provider that will service that location or is this included in the RFP? A. The RFP is entirely based on and includes the new data center location. The data center construction includes pathway from the NOC to the appropriate utilities, so no addition construction from the WAN provider should be necessary. Q56. If after hours work is required, will district personnel be available? A. Yes. The District will coordinate necessary personnel to support work on non-instructional days. Q57. Do we need to specify subcontractors for the construction work up-front? A. Yes. Subcontractors must be specified up front. The district must validate both their professional qualifications as well as observe Department of Justice clearance requirements for work on school campuses. Q58. What is the status of the new schools under construction? A. Jeffrey Trail MS Constructed Opens September 2013 PA 40 ES- Pre-Construction Opens September 2014 Heritage Fields K-8 Design Opens TBD High School #5 Design Opens 2016 Other Sites TBD based on enrollment growth. Q59. Does the RFP include installing a Provider owned/leased router at the NOC? A. Yes. The RFP includes a provider owned/leased router at the NOC. Please see Question 9 for clarification on the options for equipment. Q60. Will IUSD be releasing a minimum requirement list for the equipment that was talked about at the bidders meeting? 9

10 A. IUSD does not have a vendor preference for the equipment. Minimum equipment standard should support 1Gbps (fiber interface) connection to hand-off. Future upgrade to 10Gbps connection (fiber interface) may require hardware replacement to accommodate 10Gbps connection. Vendors may use the following as a benchmark for hardware minimum requirements/equivalency: School site routers: Cisco 3925E Data Center: Nexus 7010 Chassis 10