Richland County School District One Competitive Best Value Bid Amendment No. 1

Transcription

1 Richland County School District One Competitive Best Value Bid Amendment No. 1 Solicitation No. Date Issued Buyer Phone Address CBVB October 26, 2018 LaShonda Outing, CPPB lashonda.outing@richlandone.org DESCRIPTION: Erate Eligible Network Electronics Hardware and Support The Term "Offer" Means Your "Bid" or "Proposal". SUBMIT OFFER BY (Opening Date/Time): November 12, 2018 by 2:00 PM Eastern NUMBER OF COPIES TO BE SUBMITTED: (1) Electronic PDF copy via to lashonda.outing@richlandone.org Four (4) Bounded Printed Copies QUESTIONS MUST BE RECEIVED BY: N/A SUBMIT YOUR SEALED OFFER TO THE FOLLOWING ADDRESS: Procurement Services 201 Park Street Room 209 Columbia, S. C See provision entitled "Submitting Your Offer" AWARD & This solicitation, any amendments and award, will be posted at the following web address: AMENDMENTS You must submit a signed copy of this form with Your Offer. By submitting a bid or proposal, You agree to be bound by the terms of the Solicitation. You agree to hold Your Offer open for a minimum of sixty (60) calendar days after the Opening Date. NAME OF OFFEROR (Full legal name of business submitting the offer) OFFEROR'S TYPE OF ENTITY: (Check one) AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE (Person signing must be authorized to submit binding offer to enter contract on behalf of Offeror named above.) TITLE (Business title of person signing above) Small (15 employees of less) Women Minority Other (See provision entitled "Signing Your Offer".) PRINTED NAME (Printed name of person signing above) DATE Instructions regarding Offerors Name: Any award issued will be issued to, and the contract will be formed with, the entity identified as the Offeror or above. An offer may be submitted by only one legal entity. The entity named as the Offeror must be a single and distinct legal entity. Do not use the name of a branch office or a division of a larger entity if the branch or division is not a separate legal entity, i.e., a separate corporation, partnership, sole proprietorship, etc. OFFEROR OFFICE ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP CODE PHONE FACSIMILE STATE OF INCORPORATION (If Offeror is a corporation, identify the State of Incorporation.) TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NO. (See provision entitled Taxpayer Identification Number) COVER PAGE RCSD1 Amendment, Revision 0,

2 NOTICE Solicitation No Provide Erate Eligible Network Electronics Hardware and Support Amendment No. 1 THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION SHALL BE INCORPORATED AS PART OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED SOLICITATION; ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS SHALL REMAIN THE SAME: Core Questions/Lot A, Item 1 1. Single Mode or Multi Mode Fiber from Core to IDF's? Response: MM OM3 or better. 2. For the Core Switch, the mbps fiber optic connections, would this be 1GB or 10GB? Response: 10 Gbps at the core. Distribution Questions/Lot A, Item 2 3. Is this just user distribution, or are servers terminating on the same switch stack? Response: Fiber aggregation to the data closets. 4. Quantity says 60, but port density states 192. Are these multiple implementations? Response: Yes, there will be Multiple implementations. 5. What are the modular interface quantities and types needed to support server/storage infrastructure? Response: SFP+ 10 Gbps interfaces throughout; Fully populate each proposed chassis. Edge Questions/Lot A, Item 3 6. Switch quantity states 1530, but port density states Which number should we be targeting? Response: Bidder shall target 1530; there are 48 port devices. 7. Could a network diagram be provided in order to size this opportunity accurately? Response: There is no Diagram available at this time. 8. Running Layer 2 or Layer 3 on the edge? If Layer 2, does this traffic terminate on the distribution or core? Terminate or Distribution or Core. Response: Collapsed core design, L2 at the access layer. Core Firewall/Lot B, Item 1 9. Need to know how many endpoints need to be managed for off-net web filtering. Response: District will need 30K devices managed. CBVB Amendment No. 1 Page 2 of 6

3 10. Is 15 Gbps really needed for SSL inspection? We have a product to fit these specifications, but we would like to make sure we are not over-sizing for the environment. Response: Vendors are encouraged to offer products to meet minimum specifications size in accordance with specification as outlined. School Firewalls/Lot B, Item The SSL inspection number seems to be very aggressive. We have a product to fit these specifications, but we would like to make sure we are not over-sizing for the environment. Response: Vendors are encouraged to offer products to meet minimum specifications size rather than under. 12. Core Switch does each switch need to have no less than 336 1Gig RJ45 ports and 48 10G SFP ports and 2 10G SFP ports for connecting Peer? Or, the total number of ports (e.g., 336 1G ports) are the total of the peers (e.g., 2 Core switches set up as VSS peer)? Response: A single core switch per MDF. 13. Is the total number of Cores 6 (six) or does it require 6 peers (total 12 core switches)? If not core redundancy at the chassis level (e.g., peer), would you prefer core redundancy at system level (e.g., double supervisor engines in a single chassis)? Response: Total number is 6 core redundant switches. 14. How many years of maintenance/support is required for the switches? Response: Do not include extended maintenance. 15. Do you prefer to fully populate the SFP ports with SFPs? Or, can you provide more information on the total number of physical connection (sfp bandwidth and fiber/sfp type) from core to distribution and from distribution to stack switches? Response: The SFP must be fully populated in response to this proposal. 16. Would you prefer to see the switch models that even exceed the performance requirements (next generation models)? Will you weight the costing factor if the device far exceeds the requirements (in features, capabilities, throughput, speed etc.)? Response: District shall evaluate like or similar make/model/generation products that will meet the needs of the District. 17. Can you provide the aggregation and access stack information (e.g., number of stacks and number of switches in each stack)? This will help us better estimate the number of long stack cables for each stack. Response: Offeror shall provide full stacks for the offering, depth will depend on offeror s manufacturer proposal. 18. How many links (redundant links) does the District prefer to have from core to each aggregation/stack and from aggregation to each access switch/stack? Response: The District prefers a minimum of 2. CBVB Amendment No. 1 Page 3 of 6

4 19. What is the fiber type (e.g., SM, MM (OM1-4)) from MDF/MTR to IDF/TR Response: The fiber type is OM3 50um. 20. What is the fiber connector type (e.g., LC, SC, ST) in MTR and TR patch panels? Response: The fiber connector is SC. 21. What is the average distance for fiber patch cables (in all closets) to connect from patch panel to the switch uplink? Response: The average distance is 3m. 22. Please clarify the number of hardcopy deliverables: One Original plus Three copies of Volume I Technical Proposal, and Does RCSD1 want One, Two, or Four copies of Volume II Bid Schedule? Response: Bidder shall provide 1 original and 3 copies Printed of Volume I and 1 Original copy of Volume 2, Bid Schedule. 23. Does RCSD1 want an submittal of a PDF of Volume I and a PDF of Volume II in one or two separate s? Response: Bidder shall provide 1 with 2 separate PDF documents labeled according. 24. Would RCSD1 also like an electronic copy on a USB Flash Drive? IF yes, Can Volume I and II be on the same drive or separate drives? Response: Both Volumes I and II on same (one) USB flash Drive. 25. Will the school district provide short term storage at each school for the equipment during the implementation at that school? Or, the vender needs to plan for storage off site each night even during the implementation? Response: Bidder shall provide storage off site for equipment. 26. What type of fiber is installed? Response: See response to Question 19 and Question Are SFPs 1 gig or 10 gig? Response: 10 Gbps 28. Are we using any existing switches for the stacking with the new switching; Richland 1 mentioned using the poe as the top switch? Response: No. 29. Will we be installing poe and non-poe switches in the stack or just poe? Response: Vendor shall install POE. 30. Are heatmaps part of the scope of work for the vendor? Response: No. 31. The Intent to Award Statement is scheduled for December 12, 2018 and the Effective Date of Contract will not occur until July 1, Will there be an allowance for updated pricing should there be vendor price changes during this period? Response: Prices submitted in accordance with this offer must be firm fixed pricing for the life of the contract. CBVB Amendment No. 1 Page 4 of 6

5 32. In Lot A, Items 1-3 (pg ) descriptions (Switches), will you issue an estimated port count for Network, Distribution, and Edge switches? Response: Assume 48 port switches throughout the offer. 33. In Lot A, Item 2 (pg. 40) (Distribution layer switches) you give a requirement for route updates via EIGRP protocol. As this is a Cisco-proprietary routing protocol, would you be open to using a similar, industry-standard routing protocol such as OSPF? Response: The District has no plans at this time to redesign the current routing or routed protocols in place. 34. In Lot A, Items 4-6 (pg ) (Wireless APs) there is a requirement of integration with a Richland One XCS management system. Is this a custom system designed by and for your school district and what are the basic integration elements that are needed? You mention Xirrus APs in your description. Is this management system designed to work only with this brand AP or do you anticipate that it could be adapted to other wireless vendors. Response: Bidder should address this question to the manufacturers. 35. In Lot B, Items 1-2 (pg ) (Firewalls) you mention a requirement to integrate with Panorama centralized management system. As this specific to Palo Alto firewalls, are you open to alternate vendor firewalls with comparable management systems specific to their brand? Response: Solution must be compatible with Panorama centralized management system. 36. Regarding mounting of wireless access points, is the intent to mount/hang them from suspended ceilings? If not can you provide a list with quantities of the types of surfaces that would be required so we can specify the required mounting hardware? Response: Ceiling tile mounts will be required. 37. Are drawings of the facilities available for RF planning of wireless access points? Response: Drawings for RF planning will be provided. 38. The switch specification lists on all the switches, that the product needs to support EIGRP, which is a Cisco proprietary protocol. Will the school system accept alternate switch bids other than Cisco? Response: The District has no plans at this time to redesign the current routing or routed protocols in place. Any equipment proposed will need to work with the existing network infrastructure designs. 39. Under the Lot A, Items 4 & 5, wireless access points, what is the Richland One XCS management system? What integration is required? Response: Integration into existing District management platforms for enterprise management will be necessary. Such as the ability to remotely manage wireless devices, monitor the resource usage and push firmware and security updates to them remotely. 40. Is the District wanting hardware and installation only? Response: The District is seeking hardware, installation, configuration, training and support. CBVB Amendment No. 1 Page 5 of 6

6 41. The Firewall section on page 15 (part B section 2. J.) says, provide 24/7/365 support for the solution. Does this just mean manufacturer support? Or are you asking for ongoing services? Response: The District is seeking premium support 24/7/365 regardless of who is providing the support; if manufacturer does not provide or company does not provide this service, then it does not meet the District requirements. ************ END OF AMENDMENT NO. 1 ************ OFFEROR MUST ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THIS AMENDMENT PRIOR TO DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED IN THE SOLICITATION, OR AS AMENDED, BY ONE OR THE FOLLOWING METHODS: (A) BY SIGNING AND RETURNING ONE COPY OF THIS AMENDMENT WITH YUR BID; (B) BY ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT OF THIS AMENDMENT ON EACH COPY OF THE OFFER SUBMITTED; OR (C) BY SEPARATE LETTER OR TELEGRAM WHICH INCLUDES A REFERENCE TO THE SOLICITATION AND AMENDMENT NUMBER(S). FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE ISSUING OFFICE PRIOR TO DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. IF, BY VIRTUE OF THIS AMENDMENT YOU DESIRE TO CHANGE AN OFFER ALREADY SUBMITTED, SUCH CHANGE MAY BE MADE BY LETTER OR TELEGRAM, PROVIDED SUCH LETTER OR TELEGRAM MAKES REFERENCE TO THE SOLICITATION AND THIS AMENDMENT AND IS RECEIVED PRIOR TO DATE AND TIME SPECIFIED. ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED. CBVB Amendment No. 1 Page 6 of 6