California Telehealth Network
Request for
Proposals
RFP Question and Answer
CTN RFP # 2009-02
The following Questions and Answers (Q&A) previously posted for CTN RFP #2008-001 also apply to CTN RFP #2009-02:
The following Q&A previously posted for CTN RFP #2008-001 do not apply to CTN RFP #2009-02:
The following Q&A previously posted for CTN RFP #2008-001 apply to CTN RFP #2009-02, with edits as indicated below:
Q&A 43: reference to RFC #2547 in this question, should be updated with a reference to the more recently released RFC #4364. In general, all references to RFC #2547 in RFP #2009-02 should be replaced with a reference to RFC #4364.
07/01/2009
Q1: When is the RFP due?
A1: As listed in the addendum all proposals will be due 28 days following the posting of CTN RFP #2009-02 on the USAC Rural Health Care Pilot Program RFP page. UPDATED: As stated in the announcement section, the RFP open period has been extended to 07/31/2009.
Q2: How long will the Q & A period be open for CTN RFP #2009-02?
A2: As stated in the addendum the Q & A period will be open for two weeks following the posting date.
07/06/2009
Q3: Do you know if there is going to be a bidders conference like they did the first time?
A3: There are currently no plans to schedule a Bidder's Conference for the current RFP.
Q4: Is their an easy reference that describes what has changed from the first RFP to this new version?
A4: The RFP Preface and Addendum Sections of the current RFP comprise the major changes from the previous RFP. All subtantive differences between the current RFP (CTN RFP #2009-02) and the previous RFP (CTN RFP #2008-001) have been itemized in the Addendum. As stated in the Preface, Bidders are advised to carefully review the Addendum for new or updated Bidder response requirements.
07/08/2009
Q5: How can I get a list of the companies/consortiums who previously bid or are preparing to bid on the RFP?
A5: As described in previous Q&A #2 , dated 12/29/2008, CTN does not distribute information regarding vendors who have expressed interest in responding to CTN RFP's. CTN has established a forum where potential Bidders may post their interests in establishing a consortium for the purpose of responding to CTN RFP's. More information regarding the forum may be obtained by reviewing the "Information Update" item, dated 01/12/2009, on the CTN RFP Web site.
07/14/2009
Q6: Can a provider do only a percentage of the locations or must it be all locations in the RFP?
A6: As stipulated in Section 1.2.2.3, Prime Contractor, Consortiums of Bidders and Single Award: "No partial or split awards will be made."
Q7: Can you elaborate on your plans for Multicast? What is the applicaiton, type of multicast protocoal you plan to use, equipment to be used as part of the solution?
A7: Regular distribution of real-time multimedia-enabled distance education materials will be an important component of CTN value-added services. CTN anticipates increasing bandwidth demands for such services, since we envision an expanding use of HD video format. Multicast services are potentially useful in distributing such materials in a bandwidth-efficient format. CTN envisions establishment of a Media Center, where such materials will be distributed in real-time, as well as archived. This location will serve as the unicast source and will probably reside within the CTN proper. Thus, multicast interdomain routing will more than likely not be required. CTN does not envision the need for bidirectional multicast support (Bidir). Specific decisions regarding precise multicast protocol and supporting equipment/software have not been made. Bidders are invited to expand their discussion of multicast support as it relates to the intended purpose of unidirectional multimedia distribution within the CTN.
Q8: Regarding funding for CTN proposal - has the USAC, RHPP, CTN funding increased to coincide with the additional participant sites added to the proposal?
A8: To date, CTN-C has not obtained any additional pledged funding, although additional funding streams are currently being negotiated. For purposes of responding to the RFP, Bidder's should propose infrastructure and services commensurate with supporting the entire complement of 860+ sites. As stated in Section 1.2.2.6 of the RFP, CTN-C will endeavor to include as many Participant sites as possible, but reserves the sole prerogative to determine the actual number of sites supported.
Q9: Please help us clarify or understand what constitutes a "significantly modified" proposal warranting the submittal of a written response to the addendum?
A9: CTN-C acknowledges that certain Bidders submitted largely responsive proposals to RFP # 2008-001. Recognizing that the current RFP (#2009-02) has been minimally altered from the previous version (#2008-001) and in the interest of simplifying the submission process for these Bidders, all sections of the RFP where CTN-C anticipates that changes/updates to Bidder's previous submissions would occur have been listed in Section A.2 "Addendum Only Responses". Proposals from previously responsive Bidders who provide the designated responses to Section A.2 of the current RFP will have fulfilled all the new requirements. If however, Bidder elects to significantly revise additional sections of their RFP proposal other than those sections specifically listed in Section A.2 of the Appendix, Bidder should conclude that the scope of revisions is sufficiently extensive as to require a complete new submission, as stipulated in Section 1 of the RFP.
CTN-C will exercise some flexibility in this area. If Bidders wishes to make minor revisions or corrections to previous responses to sections that are not specifically listed in Appendix A.2, these will be accepted, subject to the stipulation that collectively they must constitute no more than three pages of itemized revisions in the standard font and page size incorporated in the main body of Bidder's proposal. These itemized revisions should be included in the Addendum response.
CTN RFP # 2008-001
Q1: How long will the RFP remain open?
A1: The RFP due date has been extended to February 27th, 2009 due to the holiday season. Note this is greater than the 60 days from the posting date listed on the USAC Rural Health Care Pilot Program RFP page.
12/29/2008
Q2: We are the (Competitive or Incumbent) Local Exchange Carrier for a number of the Participant sites that have been listed in the California Telehealth Network RFP # 2008-001 and wish to submit a proposal. We note however, that the RFP requires that Bidders provide a solution encompassing the entire complement of sites throughout the state. Our coverage area does not extend statewide and therefore, in order to participate, we would need to partner with one or more additional carriers. Can you publish a list of carriers and/or service providers who have expressed an interest in this project?
A2: In order to meet FCC open competitive bidding requirements for the Rural Health Care Pilot Program, California Telehealth Network may not restrict the submission of proposals to an arbitrary list of carriers or service providers, nor can we selectively recruit bidders. We have initially notified via broadcast email, a large list of potential carriers and service providers who have independently contacted us and who have expressed interest in our project. We expect that numerous interested Bidders will also learn of the RFP posting through the USAC RHCPP web site. As a practical matter however, CTN has no means of determining which of the multiple potential carriers and service providers may actually plan to submit proposals. Moreover, it would be contrary to the competitive bidding process for CTN to attempt to coordinate or participate in the formation of consortia among Bidders.
Consequently, we do not intend to publish a list of carriers and service providers who have expressed interest in our project, since: 1) we do not have explicit permission from the carriers and service providers to do so; 2) any such list would necessarily be incomplete and would serve to disadvantage potential Bidders who are not included.
1/8/2009
Q3: Will Dedicated Internet Access for the CTN participants as described in the RFP be offered only through the CENIC (Internet 2, NLR) network connection or is a separate Dedicated Internet Service Provider connection also desired?
Reviewing the information provided in the RFP it would appear that Internet Access (Internet 2 & NLR) in addition to access to other "government research institutions, as well as academic, public, and private health care institutions" will be provided via CENIC in California.
A3: Referring to Section 2.12.1.1 of the RFP, "External Networks," bidders are required to provide a connectivity solution for CENIC, Internet 2 and NLR networks. Bidders are not required to provide services for the Commodity Internet. Referring to the NOTE immediately following Section 2.12.1.1 paragraph 3 of the RFP, Bidders may meet the I2 and NLR connectivity requirements by providing a single direct connection to the CENIC network, which in addition to providing network connectivity to academic and research organizations within the state (e.g., UC campuses) would serve as a gateway to both I2 and NLR networks. Bidders are free to propose however, alternative connectivity solutions for I2 and NLR if in the judgment of Bidder, such connectivity offers technical, cost or operational advantages, as long as they meet the functionality requirements described in Sections 2.12.1.1 paragraph 2 and 2.12.1.1 paragraph 3 of the RFP. In that case Bidder may propose a direct connection to CENIC and in addition, one or more connections through separate modalities to I2 and NLR.
Q4: Will it be necessary for the CTN provider to deliver the services described in 2.9.1 Firewall / Intrusion Prevention System Services of the RFP to intra-CTN traffic transiting between all participants or will it be incumbent upon the individual participants to protect their networks from traffic originating from other participants?
A4: Bidders are only required to provide Firewall/Intrusion Prevention System Services for external network traffic. Referring to Section 2.9.1 paragraph 1 of the RFP:
"The System must be physically or logically interposed between internal CTN traffic and all external traffic sources at every connection and peering point with an external network ("external networks" do not include RTN's).
Section 2.9.1 of the RFP. should be interpreted to mean that in addition to RTN's, any participant site directly connected to the CTN, as itemized in Appendix C of the RFP, should not be considered an "external network."
Q5: In order to further secure the CTN network at the edge will it be a requirement that CTN participant sites limit their Internet access to only the CTN provided Internet Access provider?
A5: Individual sites may elect to establish or continue access to the Commodity Internet through an independent service provider, using circuit(s) that are physically separate from CTN connectivity. Sites that do so however, will be fully responsible for addressing all potential technical and operational issues that may result, including IP addressing issues, potential route loop issues, etc. Section 2.7.3 of the RFP: "RTN Connections: Designation of Responsibilities," itemizes respective responsibilities of a Rural Telehealth Network (RTN) and Contractor. Bidders may consider that the responsibilities listed for RTN's in Section 2.7.3.2 shall extend to any individual participant site that elects to establish or maintain a separate Internet service through separate circuits.
1/15/2009
Q6: The CTN Invoicing Process - how will it work?
A6: The CTN Consortium (CTN-C) and its Contractors must adhere to policies and processes established by the governmental funding sources that support the RHCPP Initiative. Currently, FCC/USAC, sponsoring the RHCPP and California Public Utilities Commission, sponsoring the California Teleconnect Fund Program (CTF), each have separate funding and invoicing requirements. Through numerous discussions with both parties, CTN has established what we believe to be a compliant invoicing process that adheres to the requirements of both programs. As stipulated in the RFP however, CTN and its Contractors must recognize that final authority for establishing the invoicing process resides with the respective funding agencies, who reserve the right to modify existing procedures or establish new and additional requirements.
Based upon our current understanding of RHCPP and CTF invoicing requirements, the following step-by-step description has been prepared.
CTN Contractor Invoicing Process
In addition, USAC has provided the following flow diagram that summarizes the USAC-RHCPP invoicing process. Please note that the diagram illustrates several stages of the process that are internal to USAC-CTN communications and that will not involve Contractor.
USAC Invoice Process Flowchart
1/22/2009
Q7: Will modifications to the SLAs be considered?
A7: Referring to Sections 2.14.1.1, 2.14.1.2 and 2.14.1.3 of the RFP, Bidders are not required to meet a uniform standard of Performance Benchmarks that encompass every Participant Site. As stated in these Sections, CTN-C recognizes that depending upon location, availability of and distance from local telecommunications facilities, as well as communications technologies proposed, achievable performance metrics may vary. Consequently, Bidders have the latitude to propose multiple sets of performance metrics that are each appropriate and achievable under their proposed architectures. This flexibility does not however, extend to Service Level Agreement terms and conditions. SLA terms and conditions shall apply uniformly to each set of Bidder's proposed performance metrics. Consequently, Bidders should adjust the proposed performance metrics in such a fashion that adherence to the stated SLA terms and conditions can be realistically supported for each set of proposed performance benchmarks.
Q8: Will modification to the IP Routing requirements (eg, MPLS with BGP route redistribution) be considered?
A8: Referring to RFP Section 2.6.1.1.3: the IP routing requirements as stated in the RFP are intended to uniformly request: "MPLS (with BGP route redistribution) or equivalent." Bidders are free to propose any routing protocol or any IP addressing plan that provides equivalent performance, capacity and features and that also meet the performance and interoperability requirements as stated in Section 2.6 of the RFP. Bidders shall be required to dynamically exchange routes with external networks that operate eBGP4 routing protocols, but Bidders may propose to do so in whatever fashion is most appropriate under their proposed architecture.
Q9: Will modification to the QOS requirements (eg, MPLS-COS QOS with DSCP classification level: EF, AF41, etc) be considered?
A9: MPLS-COS and DSCP are industry-standard protocols for providing explicit delineated QOS. Bidders are not however, required to propose one of these two protocols. Bidders are required to demonstrate that the proposed network architecture and associated routing protocols can provide equivalent explicit, delineated QOS through whatever technical or protocol means that Bidder proposes to employ. The proposed technology and associated protocols shall permit CTN participants to designate specific traffic streams within the aggregate CTN network traffic as high priority and consequently receive preferential queuing, etc. Bidders must demonstrate however, that regardless of whatever technologies or supporting protocols would be employed internally within the CTN to achieve delineated QOS, the capability will exist to exchange explicit QOS designations with external networks that may employ either MPLS-COS or DSCP, as designated in RFP Section 2.8.1.1.1.1.
Q10: Is SNMP a firm requirement? Will alternate management processes be considered?
A10: Referring to Section 2.10.2, CTN-C reserves the right to establish a separate network monitoring service. We currently anticipate the need to receive SNMP data streams from selected nodes within Contractor's network in order to do so. Bidder may propose alternative means of providing real-time network status information. Bidders may interpret Section 2.10.2 to stipulate: "SNMP or equivalent."
Q11: Will all remote rural locations have a minimum of 100 IPs per site?
A11: The designation of 100 available IP addresses per site is arbitrary. We expect that very few sites will need to deploy more than 30 IP addresses; for the majority of sites probably, five or less. The intent of this stipulation is to ensure that the IP addressing plan that Bidder proposes will possess the capability to accommodate extensive expansion of: 1) the number of nodes at each site; 2) the total number of sites that can be accommodated, without requiring any large-scale re-addressing of existing nodes in order to accommodate expansion. Bidder's may meet the requirements of Sections 2.5.1.1 and 2.5.1.2 by convincingly demonstrating that the proposed internal IP addressing plan can accommodate extensive expansion, while minimizing the need for re-addressing or other network disruptions.
Q12: Based on Section 1.2.2.6, is it safe to assume that CTN-C will roll-out CTN to the rural areas (areas with RUCA score of 7 and up) first before proceeding to the other sites?
A12: Referring to Section 1.2.2.6, priority will be given to rural sites, particularly rural sites for which the availability of existing regional telecommunications infrastructure is limited. Although priority consideration will be given to such sites, CTN-C reserves the sole right to establish and to modify as necessary, the order of site implementation, taking into account multiple factors in addition to rurality. For the purpose of submitting a responsive proposal, Bidders are required to propose a solution for each of the listed Participant Sites in Appendix C and D of the proposal. Prior to implementation of project build-out, CTN-C in consultation with Contractor, will establish a working order of implementation that will seek to prioritize rural sites, but that will take into account other technical, logistical, financial and clinical considerations.
Q13: In Section 1.2.3, the Three Year Contract is contradictory to a month-to-month service commitment. Is CTN-C asking for a 3-year FFP for a month-to-month service?
A13: CTN-C is requesting a minimum three-year contract for services that is acceptable to FCC and USAC as an "Evergreen Contract" for services. Since the CTN will be comprised of several hundred Participant Sites, we anticipate that inevitably, some Sites will terminate their participation, others will join, some sites will lose their eligibility for reimbursement under the RHCPP policies. Consequently, CTN-C is requesting that month-to-month terms be extended to each Participant Site, with no early termination fees. CTN-C will consider including within the Contract, a minimum total number of connections that need to be maintained throughout the agreement, so that Contractor will have a predictable basis upon which to determine costs, margins, etc. Such terms would have to take into consideration, an agreed-upon implementation schedule, during which the number of connected Participant Sites would be increasing, but may not have reached the designated minimum.
Q14: Will CTN-C offer any relief on its complex invoicing requirement (i.e. Contractor shall invoice separately: CTN-C, USAC-RHCPP, CPUC-CTF, and/or other federal or state government granting programs that may require direct invoicing by the contractor)?
A14: CTN-C currently anticipates funding support from two principal government-sponsored programs: 1) Rural Health Care Pilot Program (FCC); 2) California Teleconnect Fund (CPUC). The invoicing requirements articulated in the CTN RFP have been established by those programs. Both programs require that they receive invoice documents directly from the Contractor. Moreover, both programs stipulate that funds will be paid directly to the Contractor(s), not to the CTN-C. CTN-C will not receive any payments directly from either programs and consequently, must require that Contractor assume the primary responsibility for submission of invoices. In response to earlier questions, CTN-C has prepared a step-by-step description of the invoicing process that has been proposed to, reviewed and approved by RHCPP and CTF. Please refer to the following link (CTN Contractor Invoicing Process) for a step-by-step description of the process as best we currently understand it. CTN-C is willing to work with Contractor to modify or streamline the invoicing process in a mutually advantageous fashion, while maintaining full adherence to the policies and procedures that have been currently, or in future established by our governmental funders.
2/5/2009
Q15: Are Bidder responses required within the bodies of Appendices C, D, E, F and G?
A15: Appendices C, and D are informational and provide Participant data that Bidders will use to complete responses for other sections of the RFP, including the Technical and Cost Sections. No specific responses are required within the body of these Appendices. Note that Bidders are required to propose a technical solution for every Participant site listed in Appendix C and every Regional Telehealth Network listed in Appendix D.
Appendix E provides a worksheet and associated instructions that permit Bidder to group multiple Participants under a single response. If for example, Bidder proposes to provide an identical technical solution (or an identical cost) for a group of Participants, Bidder may use the worksheet in Appendix E to define a Group Identifier for that group and to then refer to the group by the Group Identifier in other sections of Bidder's response. Bidders may define as many Groups as desired in order to comprehensively provide responses. No responses are required within the body of this Appendix. If Bidders elect not to group Participants, this worksheet will not be necessary.
Appendix F provides worksheets and associated instructions that Bidders will use to report costs. Detailed instructions are provided regarding how costs should be grouped and formatted and which of the multiple worksheets comprising the Appendix should be used to report particular costs. No new technical, project management or other non-cost-related requirements that require a Bidder response are included in Appendix F. Bidder is free to organize the cost reporting, provide narrative clarifications, etc., in whatever high-level fashion best reflects Bidder's proposal; however, the actual cost data must be formatted within the worksheets provided in this Appendix. Bidders should also note that the cost reporting section of the response should be submitted in accordance with the requirements of Section 1.3.1.7 of the RFP.
Appendix G is informational and requires no Bidder response.
3/9/2009
Q16: Please describe the CTN-C preferred logical and physical network hand-off / interface to alternate networks like Lambda Rail.
A16: Referring to Section 2.12 of the RFP, CTN-C requires network connections to three external networks:
Bidders may satisfy this requirement by providing a single physical network connection to the CENIC network, since CENIC serves as the California Regional Optical Network provider (RON) for I2 and NLR. However, Bidders should be aware of the following:
FCC has granted a waiver to I2 and NLR for purposes of eliminating the need for RHCPP grant recipients (e.g., CTN-C) to competitively bid for connections to these networks. The waivers do not however, extend to the RON’s (e.g., CENIC). Consequently, CTN-C cannot require that Bidders propose to provide a connection to I2 and NLR through CENIC, even though access to I2 and NLR are routinely acquired in this fashion for locations in California. Bidders are free to propose an alternative connection modality, as long as the resulting connection(s) provide equivalent quality and capabilities, as well as meeting equivalent cost thresholds.
This response will now consider the particulars of connecting to CENIC (a requirement of the RFP for purposes of providing direct network access to the UC’s), recognizing that Bidders may elect to propose a different solution for connecting to I2 and NLR.
CENIC maintains POP’s throughout Southern, Central and Northern California (San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Sacramento). CTN-C has no preference for connection at a specific CENIC POP. Contractor may choose any location that provides the required connectivity and services, and is mutually acceptable to CENIC and Contractor.
In coordination with CENIC, Contractor will be required to arrange for circuit installation and provisioning. Contractor will coordinate with CENIC all issues related to hardware/software acquisition and physical installation at the selected CENIC POP.
Contractor will logically provision the connection and provide the associated maintenance and monitoring services as specified in Section 2.12, Items 1 – 14 on pages 52-53 of the RFP.
Q17: Are respondents expected to price, configure, maintain and manage the CPE with respect to external network connections?
A17: If Contractor elects to establish network connections to I2 and NLR through physical or logical means separate from CENIC, Contractor will be responsible for pricing, configuring, maintaining and managing any required POP locations and associated CPE. Bidders should contact CENIC to determine their policies and requirements for interconnection with that network.
Q18: Please describe the preferred D-Marc’ation of network handoffs.
A18: Referring to Section 2.12, CTN-C has requested an OC-3 connection. However, Bidders are free to propose an alternative physical/logical modality if it better accommodates existing infrastructure at the proposed POP’s, or provides lower pricing, or better performance and reliability (e.g., gigabit Ethernet). CTN-C is requesting a managed service. Bidders may exercise flexibility in the precise physical configuration of equipment and circuits, recognizing that ultimately, they will be responsible for maintaining them.
Q19: How crucial is IPv6 capability to CTN-C’s assessment of a Bidder’s proposal as responsive?
A19: Since IPv6 is an emerging new standard for network interoperability, CTN-C requires that Bidders demonstrate the capabilities to fully support the CTN in effecting a transition to IPv6 compliance at such time as Internet routing requires it. Although desirable, CTN-C does not require that the proposed network be fully IPv6 compliant at this time. Bidders that propose a transitional network (i.e., one that is comprised of a mixture of IPv4-only and IPv6-compliant links) should clearly indicate this in the RFP response and also describe Bidder’s capabilities to effect a transition in future, to a fully IPv6-compliant network. Bidders should also note any current beneficial cost differentials that would partially justify the absence of full IPv6 compliance at the inception of the CTN.
Q20: Does CTN-C prefer leased or owned CPE?
A20: Referring to Section 2.11.11, CTN-C is requesting a Managed Equipment Service, including CE equipment and any PE equipment required to equip any POP locations proposed by Bidder that would be established expressly for the CTN and that would be dedicated to supporting CTN. Contractor will be required to provide the managed equipment services listed in Section 2.11.12 of the RFP.
Q21: Will CTN-C accept “plug and play” design; i.e., preconfigured equipment that is shipped to remote locations? Under such circumstances, local technical or other personnel would contact a remote support center to receive instructions on connecting and activating the equipment.
A21: CTN-C is sensitive to the fact that the large cadre of CTN Participants are broadly distributed throughout the state. Although we view it as a desirable capability of Contractor, physically visiting every site could be logistically difficult and complicated. CTN-C will accept an installation process that involves shipment of preconfigured equipment to CTN sites, or to local technical personnel as designated by CTN-C, with concomitant availability of installation/testing assistance from Contractor’s Customer Support Center(s). CTN-C will serve as liaison between Contractor and CTN Sites. CTN-C will assist in identifying local or regional technical personnel that can assist with installation, testing, maintenance and repair activities. Bidders should recognize however, that the selected Contractor will bear ultimate responsibility for resolving technical issues. If problems remain despite good-faith efforts by CTN-C, available local technical personnel or CTN Site personnel, Contractor will be responsible for initiating on-site assessment and remediation.
Contractor will not be responsible for resolving, upgrading or modifying existing inadequate physical infrastructure at CTN sites in order to accommodate CE equipment installations (e.g., HVAC, shelving/rack space, etc.). CTN-C will serve as liaison between Contractor and CTN customer to facilitate any necessary facility repairs, upgrades or modifications that Contractor and CTN-C jointly agree are necessary in order to adequately support CE infrastructure.
Q22: Please itemize the priorities for anticipated applications on the CTN, as they relate to QOS assignment, since this may affect the type of CPE deployment proposed.
A22: As described in Section 2.8 of the RFP, CTN-C anticipates a broad diversity of health care related applications and services will transact over the CTN. The network will also support less critical administrative and educational functions. Moreover, CTN-C cannot anticipate which physical locations may initially or eventually elect to support particular health care applications. Consequently, CTN-C requires that every site be suitably equipped and configured to support explicit end-to-end QOS (DSCP or COS). CTN-C anticipates at a minimum, each site will need to support the following services:
CTN-C anticipates that as the network matures, additional QOS-dependent functions may be added:
Q23: Is there a manufacturer preference for network equipment?
A23: Since CTN-C is requesting a managed equipment service, there is no a priori preference for equipment manufacturer, subject to the constraints that all equipment, software and services must meet the technical, maintenance and support requirements, as well as external network connectivity requirements enumerated in Section 2 of the RFP.
Q24: Will highly rural sites (i.e., RUCA score > 7) be connected first?
A24: CTN-C will give priority to rural sites, consistent with the goals of the FCC RHCPP program. CTN-C recognizes however that installations at remote rural locations may be logistically more complex and that initially concentrating exclusively on such sites could delay progress on the aggregate project, as well as disadvantage the Contractor, who will be paid on a “per site” basis. Consequently, CTN-C will work with Contractor to adopt a mutually acceptable implementation schedule that provides a reasonable higher priority for rural locations consistent with RHCPP goals, while permitting the aggregate project to proceed at a pace that is consistent with the Contractor’s resource investment.
Q25: Appendix B of the RFP seems to be targeted toward small business vendors who do not have extensive public ownership structure. How should large publically owned entities respond?
A25: The University of California is an equal opportunity employer and provides preferential consideration to small businesses and minority-owned businesses. The intent of the “University of California Business Information Form” is to provide prospective Bidders with an opportunity to report a business status that may advantage their proposal in the event that multiple Bidders are deemed to have submitted equally responsive proposals. Careful scrutiny of the form will reveal that large publically-traded companies and corporations may appropriately report their status by selecting “corporation” or “other,” as most appropriate. This is a standard form used by UC for all major RFP-based acquisitions.
3/10/2009
Q26: Multiple questions inquiring about changes in the requirements, circuit and/or hardware specifications, etc., since the RFP was released.
A26: As a general rule and consistent with the instructions given in Section 1.2.1.4 of the RFP, all changes, clarifications and notices related to this RFP have been posted on the publically accessible CTN web site under the CTN RFP #2008-001 Web Page. No additional materials have been announced or distributed, nor have any individual direct informational communications been provided to any prospective Bidders. Unless updated information has been posted on this site for RFP #2008-001, the specifications and requirements enumerated in the originally released RFP remain in effect.
Q27: Has an IP addressing plan (private or public) received tacit approval? If yes, please define it and what do you feel are its’ pros & cons.
A27: No de facto IP addressing plan has been established. Referring to Section 2.5.1 of the RFP, general requirements and capabilities of the IP addressing plan are provided. Bidder is free to propose a public or private IP addressing plan, subject to requirements enumerated in Section 2.5. If Bidder proposes a private address plan, it must meet the requirements enumerated in Section 2.5.4 requiring Contractor to provide all necessary NAT services to support ingress/egress from/to external networks. In the case of either external or internal addressing paradigms, Contractor is required to provide a complement of externally routable IP’s and associated ASN, sufficient to support the connected complement of sites, as specified in Section 2.5.5.
CTN-C will work with Contractor to apply for suitable IP address range and associated ASN in order to support long term viability of the IP addressing needs of CTN; however, Contractor must assume responsibility for providing the required IP infrastructure until appropriate CTN-specific infrastructure has been obtained and developed.
Q28: Have any CTN design perimeters for external peering points been changed or altered since release of the RFP? If yes, please explain.
A28: CTN-C has not established any requirements for physical peering points. Bidder is free to propose whichever location(s) are jointly acceptable to Bidder and the respective External Network entity, subject to the requirements enumerated in Section 2.12.1.1 of the RFP.
Q29: The RFP mandates “Provision for externally routable IP addressing for Participant access to external network services.” We envision this to mean a CTN ASN. If yes, has your organization applied for one? If yes, what is your IP subnet(s) & ASN number?
A29: CTN-C does not possess an ASN or publically routable IP address range. Referring to Section 2.5.5 of the RFP, Contractor is required to initially provide the required IP address and associated ASN to support the initial external routing requirements of the CTN. As stated in the answer above, CTN-C will work with Contractor to establish an IP routing strategy and apply for an independent ASN and IP address range, in order to ensure long term viability. Contractor must provide this infrastructure on an interim basis, or propose an implementation plan that will accommodate contemporaneous acquisition of the required IP infrastructure as well as timely implementation of the CTN.
Q30: Is there a preference for one interior routing protocol over another (EIGRP/OSPF/RIP/etc) and will it operate over the MPLS VPN?
A30: Bidders are free to propose any interior routing protocol that fully supports the network performance requirements and features enumerated in Section 2. Bidders are also advised to review section 1.2.2.4, “CTN Proposed Network Design” and to also review the technical section of the original CTN Proposal to the FCC for further guidance on meeting the requirements for network architecture and routing performance (see http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/rural/rhcp_applications.html California Telehealth Network link for original CTN Proposal).
Q31: The RFP states that external connections to educational networks such as National LambdaRail & Internet 2 are required – will these connections be open to all participants or are they restricted to a few participant.
A31: Access to all supported external networks will be available to all CTN Participants.
Q32: Is it your expectation that IPv6 be utilized from the onset of CTN operations or do you envision a gradual migration/translation?
A32: CTN-C has not established a firm requirement for immediate implementation of IPv6. Bidders are free to propose either an IPv4 or IPv6 solution, recognizing however that many legacy devices exist within the cadre of CTN participant sites and that suitable NAT services may therefore be required at the CE-PE interface. As described in Section 2.5.2 of the RFP, if an IPv4 addressing plan is initially implemented, CTN-C intends to develop a strategic plan for eventual migration to IPv6, including obtaining the requisite ASN and IP address block. In RFP Response to 2.5.1.1.1, Bidders are required to discuss their capabilities to support IPv6 and to assist CTN-C in implementing an effective migration plan.
Q33: What is the expectation for circuit upgrades and associated timeframes for activation?
A33: CTN-C recognizes that Contractor may be ordering circuit services from multiple local or regional providers, that lead times will vary among installations and to a certain extent, such delays are beyond the control of Contractor. CTN-C will work with Contractor to develop a realistic installation schedule that takes proper account of lead times. However, it is also the expectation of CTN-C that Contractor will make timely, proactive application for required orders, track them regularly and inform CTN-C on a regular basis when unexpected delays are encountered. As a general rule, CTN-C will anticipate an approximate 90 day lead time for circuit services.
Q34: Have routers and associated equipment specifications received tacit approval? If yes, please define the manufacture, models, and associated software you have identified and expect to be deployed in the field.
A34: CTN-C is requesting a Managed Equipment Service. Bidders are free to propose whatever routing and other communications equipment will best accommodate their proposed architecture and that will fully meet the requirements as stated in Section 2 of the RFP.
Q35: Have circuit specifications and provisioning requirements undergone any changes since the release of the RFP? If yes, please explain.
A35: Circuit specifications and provisioning requirements have not undergone any changes since release of the RFP.
Q36: The RFP states “Dedicated connection from each Individual Participant site to the CTN” is required. There may be sites now or in the future that have their own IP or security services that control external connections- is there a policy in place that will accommodate this scenario?
A36: Certain sites within the cadre of CTN Participants maintain an internal network, some of which access external networks through an ISP. Participants will be fully responsible for maintaining strict physical or logical segmentation between CTN-connected devices and non-CTN devices. Contractor will not be responsible for providing any maintenance or troubleshooting for internal networks for non-CTN networked devices. Contractor will however, be responsible for establishing appropriate ACL’s on CE and/or PE routers in order to prevent asymmetric routing and related routing problems that potentially could result from such mixed network environments. CTN-C will work with Contractor to develop prudent practice standards and serve as liaison with CTN Participant sites to ensure responsible adoption and adherence of standards.
Q37: Has any vendor been defined to deliver these services since RFP release:
A37: No vendors have been identified to provide any of the network or circuit services listed above for the CTN. If Bidder proposes to use one of these services, they are free to propose any collection of communications modalities and/or service providers that provide the requisite services.
Q38: The RFP mandates “Interoperable support for H.323 and SIP protocol videoconferencing” but are these the only video protocols to be used over this network? If more have been identified since release of the RFP please list them in order of preference.
A38: H.323 and SIP protocols are specifically mentioned in the RFP since the two are commonly used to support videoconferencing sessions for telemedicine. An additional intent of listing these session-level protocols is that they exemplify protocols that dynamically allocate multiple TCP/UDP ports and that frequently cause resulting session-level connectivity problems, particularly in environments that interpose firewall and NAT services between external and internal networks. Bidders may answer the general intent of the requirements by describing how the proposed network architecture, routing and addressing paradigm seamlessly supports session-oriented protocols such as H.323 and SIP, as requested in Bidder Response 2.5.2.1.1.2.
Q39: What is your long term expectation for video capabilities over this network & is it your preference to keep this video internal to the CTN?
A39: The explicit expectation of CTN-C is that its Participants will establish relationships with a broad spectrum of primary care practitioners and specialty providers both internal and external to the CTN. There will be no restrictions whatsoever placed upon Participants regarding with whom they establish health care relationships, subject of course to network accessibility constraints. Consequently CTN-C anticipates that there will be a diverse mix of internal-internal and internal-external partnerships established. Anticipating such activities necessitates that CTN must provide convenient IPsec extension of internal VPN services through external networks, as well as interoperable QOS delineation to/from external networks, as requested in Section 2.8 of the RFP.
Q40: Has a decision been reached internally on architecture to deliver an any-to-any VPN service? If yes, what are its’ defining characteristics?
A40: As stated in Section 2.8.2 of the RFP, CTN-C requires that any-to-any VPN capabilities be provided to all CTN Participant Sites . The VPN infrastructure should be such that CTN-C is not required to establish individual, point-to-point VPN tunnels to/from internal sites. Given the number of anticipated Participant Sites and the design criterion that any Site may transact with any other Site in a secure manner, the administrative overhead of individually assigning point-to-point VPN tunnels would be overburdening. Bidder may satisfy this requirement by providing IETF RFC 2547-compliant Any-to-Any IP VPN, or equivalent capabilities.
Q41: Access to specific applications within the CTN may require the use of secondary security services such as IDS, Citrix & SecureID. Have any of these second tier security services been examined during the course of this process- if yes, what are they?
A41: Bidders are not required to provide or to specifically accommodate any security services that logically reside above ISO Level 4 (transport layer). However, to the extent that NAT services and firewall services employing stateful inspection are considered a security enhancement, Bidders are required to demonstrate that session-level traffic (such as H.323 and SIP protocols) can be transparently transacted across proposed NAT and firewall security infrastructure, as stipulated in Sections 2.5.4 and 2.9.1 of the RFP. CTN-C is currently investigating additional security/authentication services that will be employed to enable application-level security. Acquisition of such products would occur through issuance of additional RFP’s at a future date.
Q42: The RFP identifies “explicit end-to-end QOS” within the CTN. We assume that certain applications over the CTN will mandate priority behavior; please tell us what they are and if any network performance criteria have changed since RFP introduction.
A42: See the Answer to Question # 22 for a listing of health care applications that are currently anticipated to require explicit QOS. No changes to network performance criteria have been made since the release of the RFP.
Q43: The RFP states “traffic segmentation and security via IETF RFC 2547–compliant MPLS VPN (or equivalent) & support for multiple levels of packet-level delineated QOS” – what data requires these mandates and have there been any changes/additions to it since the RFP was released?
A43: CTN-C anticipates (and the FCC RHCPP Program Order requires...) that the CTN be used primarily for health care related communications. Consequently, CTN-C is required to uphold HIPAA-compliant privacy and security standards that encompass the entire CTN. Moreover, it is anticipated that performance-sensitive communications such as telemedicine sessions employing live video-conferencing will represent a significant proportion of aggregate network activity. Since CTN-C cannot anticipate which Sites will transact particular types of traffic, security standard and explicit QOS capabilities must be extended to all communications at all sites. Bidder’s proposal is required to demonstrate that the network architecture is capable of supporting the required security, privacy and quality standards, as specified in Sections 2.8 and 2.9 of the RFP. Bidders are not required to specifically accommodate any particular application layer services that will use packet-level delineated QOS.
Q44: Have there been any changes to your Service Level Agreements (SLA) expectations since the release of the RFP?
A44: No
Q45: Is there a preference for how you would like to go about blocking commodity Internet access services since the RFP was released?
A45: CTN-C has no preference – Bidders are free to propose whatever mechanism would provide the required access control.
Q46: Are the following metrics static for each spoke site?
A46: Referring to Section 2.14.1 of the RFP (Network Performance Benchmarks) and specifically paragraph 2.14.1.1, CTN-C has not established “static metrics” for all sites. CTN-C recognizes that actual performance at particular locations will be highly dependent upon local infrastructure and carrier capabilities. Consequently, a set of “benchmark” performance specifications have been established that correspond to those requested under the State of California CalNet 2 Program. These are not absolute performance minimums, for which a failure to achieve at every site would result in a Bidder’s proposal to be adjudged non-responsive. Given the competitive nature of the RFP process, Bidders are encouraged to propose the most realistic specifications possible. Bidder proposals meeting or exceeding the benchmark metrics over the largest geographic extent, will receive additional quality points.
Q47: Geographic availability – has expansion of the CTN on a national/international basis been considered?
A47: CTN-C has been involved in ongoing discussions with other RHCPP programs regarding regional cooperation and possible aggregation of resulting networks. UC Davis Health System is an internationally regarded leader in telemedicine and is actively engaged in conversations regarding international telemedicine. Future expansion of the CTN on a regional, national and international basis is an intermediate to long-term possibility. Although not a requirement for RFP #2008-001, Bidders are advised to discuss their capabilities to support such expansion in their Executive Summary response, as described in Section 2.1 of the RFP.
Q48: The RFP states CTN must have “ability to adhere to a challenging project implementation timeline of interconnecting a geographically dispersed cadre of over 300 participant sites within a maximum three-year time period”. Has that changed since RFP release?
A48: No changes to the implementation timeline have been made.
Q49: "Design that supports a "sparse matrix" address plan, permitting expansion of a CTN Participant IP Netowrk Mask size without readdressing existing IP nodes at the participant site." What does sparse matrix mean?
A49: "Sparse Matrix" is a mathematical term (applied somewhat inappropriately here...) to denote a matrix with many "holes"(zero values) in it. In the context of the IP addressing plan, the intent in using this term was to convey the requirement that the IP addressing plan should be designed in a flexible enough fashion that regional reorganizations as well as expansion of address ranges at various sites can be accomodated without requiring extensive readdressing of large segments of the network.
RFP Main Page 
RFP Listings RFP Documents 2008-001 RFP Documents 2009-02 RFP Announcements/Updates RFP Q & A CTN Home
Questions: ctn@ucdmc.ucdavis.edu (916) 734-3008