ADDENDUM 3

DATE:September 4, 2015

PROJECT:Metropolitan Ethernet Services

RFP NO:744-R1526

OWNER:The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston

TO:Prospective Proposers

This Addendum forms part of and modifies Proposal Documents dated, August 12, 2015, with amendments and additions noted below.

1. Prospective Bidder’s Questions and University Responses: Proposers should reflect on the provided information and prepare their proposals accordingly.

  • QUESTION 1: Metro E Ring & SIP: What are the sites that will be added to the UVN ring; (Building, Floor, and room) from the posted Exhibit 1: Remote Circuit Line Details?

ANSWER 1: Section 5.4.1.2 identifies the three locations on campus where the ring should pass. The other sites are identified in Exhibit 1. Each location has a standard demarcation for that building and this is where you should land your circuit and equipment.

  • QUESTION 2: Metro E Ring & SIP: We will need the Location A destination and Location Z destination for each Service channel being built on the ring and the required bandwidth between the sites. For Example: Please build a 10 G service channel between Primary Data Center and Secondary DC.

ANSWER 2: As noted in Section 5.4.1.3, the three circuits located onto the campus infrastructure should be 10 gigabit handoffs. Additional handoffs are detailed by location in Exhibit 1. Additional bandwidth information has been provided in Exhibit 2 for most locations. Each bidder has complete flexibility in how they will build a robust and scalable solution using this information. We do not expect each bidder to be exactly alike in their proposed solution.

  • QUESTION 3: Metro E Ring & SIP: What is the model and version of the AVAYA PBX for the SIP?

ANSWER 3: Avaya Aura 6.3.11

  • QUESTION 4: Metro E Ring & SIP: What type of transport would you like to the SIP to travel on? (MIS or MPLS).

ANSWER 4: This can be negotiated post award.

  • QUESTION 5: Metro E Ring & SIP: SIP Call Paths: Number of Concurrent Calls?

ANSWER 5: 600 initially, with room to grow as needed.

  • QUESTION 6: Metro E Ring & SIP: Will they be porting telephone numbers? If so, how many?

ANSWER 6: Yes, 22,088

  • QUESTION 7: Metro E Ring & SIP: How many new telephone numbers are required?

ANSWER 7: 2

  • QUESTION 8: Cloud Base: What is your expected bandwidth requirement to Amazon Web Services? For Example, oursolution offers Minimum Bursting Capability, essentially a CIR of expected bandwidth to the respective CSP (Cloud Service Provider). Example: 100M, 300M, 600M, 1G, or greater (Up to 5G)

ANSWER 8: There is insufficient information at present to define a bandwidth level. Bidder should provide details of their offering including: technical specifications, installation and change costs, bandwidth charges for varying bandwidth levels as detailed in Section 6. Please include how your solution alters/changes AWS data transfer costs, support model, and contractual terms of the service.

  • QUESTION 9: Cloud Base: What is your expected bandwidth requirement to Microsoft Azure? For Example, oursolution offers Minimum Bursting Capability, essentially a CIR of expected bandwidth to the respective CSP (Cloud Service Provider). Example: 100M, 300M, 600M, 1G, or greater (Up to 5G)

ANSWER 9: There is insufficient information at present to define a bandwidth level. Bidder should provide details of their offering including: technical specifications, installation and change costs, bandwidth charges for varying bandwidth levels as detailed in Section 6. Please include how your solution alters/changes Azure data transfer costs, support model, and contractual terms of the service.

  • QUESTION 10: Please confirm assumption. Is UT Health expecting vendor to bring sites on as their current agreement terms expire (IE: 12 sites in 2016, 18 sites in 2017 and 19 sites in 2018)?

ANSWER 10: Yes

  • QUESTION 11: Can UT Health identify (list) the most strategic site locations;Locations that would make good aggregations sites in building a network solution?

ANSWER 11: Enough information has been provided for each bidder to create their own unique and custom solution based on their service offerings and our needs.

  • QUESTION 12: Would UT Health allow us to use buildings and schools locations listed on page 3 of 21 (Buildings & Schools) as aggregation sites for the clinics?

ANSWER 12: UTHealth already maintains a “hub and spoke” approach for our clinics from two on-campus locations. If you are proposing using one of our on-campus locations in the Texas Medical Center as a primary hub for remote circuits, we would suggest this does not comply with Section 5.4.1.1.

  • QUESTION 13: Does the University want the insurance certificate submitted to the contact listed in Appendix Two, separately from the RFP response?

ANSWER 13: Yes.

  • QUESTION 14: There are some discrepancies for KEY address & detail information in the bid (See questions 4 & 5 below) - respectfully requesting 2 weeks extension for response

ANSWER 14: Addendum 1 was posted on Tuesday, August 25, 2015 to address concerns related to the Austin, Brownsville, Guadalupe and San Antonio locations. University declines the request for extension.

  • QUESTION 15: What is the main BTN/billing telephone number for each of the sites & who is the current voice vendor?

ANSWER 15: To protect the privacy of our current vendors, this information will not be provided during the RFP process

  • QUESTION 16: Are you requiring a Performance Bond for this RFP? If so, what are the parameters? If not, can the mention of the Performance Bond in the Sample T&Cs be red-lined/struck?

ANSWER 16: Yes; The awarded Contractor will be responsible for providing and maintaining an annually renewed Performance Bond in the amount of $250,000.00 throughout the life of the contract.

  • QUESTION 17: What is the exact street address, floor, room for OTS Austin in fields B6, 11, & 34?

ANSWER 17: See issued Addendum 1.

  • QUESTION 18: Can Column C information for address, city, state, zip, phone number, and floor, room data be completed for exact information?

ANSWER 18: No. A physical address, which is provided for all on-campus and remote locations, is all that is needed at this time to complete the bid document.

  • QUESTION 19: For SIP, will TLS, T.38, or any other non-standard SIP mechanisms be required by UTHSC-H?

ANSWER 19: TLS – Preferred (strong Cyphers), T.38 - required

  • QUESTION 20: Please describe UTHSC-H's SMS requirements in full detail. (IE: U2U, U2C, C2U -

ANSWER 20: UTHSC-H currently does not utilize SMS capabilities however we are exploring the use of these services as we proceed with further refining our contact center business model. Communications paths will initially be utilized for business to customer (B2C) and internal communications however detailed technical specifications have not been defined at this time. Please provide an overview of the SMS capabilities of your offer.

  • QUESTION 21: What are the current make, model, and software version of the routers UTHSC-H is using? What are current CDP/LLDP standards?

ANSWER 21: The network is comprised entirely of Cisco switches. Circuits will terminate on Cisco Catalyst 3650, 3850, 4500, 6500 or 6800 equipment. All devices are on reasonably current versions of software. IOS-XE 3.5 and above or IOS 15 and higher. CDP/LLDP support is optional.

  • QUESTION 22: What are the details of the QoS tags required to be honored by winning bidder?

ANSWER 22: The ability to set both DSCP and/or COS on our traffic and have those markings preserved end-to-end is extremely desirable. That does not mean the service provider gives any priority to this traffic, it just means that the markings don’t get modified. UTHealth does require a small priority queue for voice traffic and we currently mark this traffic COS 5/DSCP 46 on our network. Our expectation is that the provider will provide priority queuing for this traffic at each hop across their network. Most sites will be fine with 2Mbps or less of priority traffic.

  • QUESTION 23: What VLAN configurations are currently setup?

ANSWER 23: UTHealth does not require VLAN extension between sites at present but this capability is highly desirable because networks aren’t static and future applications may require it. Our preference would be for the provider to use Q-in-Q (or similar technology) that would allow UTHealth to define its own VLAN tags.

  • QUESTION 24: What are current CDP/LLDP standards?

ANSWER 24: CDP/LLDP support is optional.

  • QUESTION 25: Instead of referencing & repeating each question & item number is it permissible to respond to each question "inline"/underneath each question to reduce length of bidder response?

ANSWER 25: University requires that responses follow the question for each criteria scoring item. It is in Proposers best interest to clearly respond, directly beneath every question to ensure proposals are given a corresponding score.

  • QUESTION 26: What are the current make, model, and software version of the Session Border Controllers UTHSC-H is using?

ANSWER 26: Avaya (formally Sipera) ASBCE Advanced Session Boarder Controller for Enterprise 6.2Q

  • QUESTION 27: Will UTHSC accept Layer 3 network with same fiber-fed layer 1 for this bid?

ANSWER 27: The RFP does not preclude bidder from proposing a layer-3 solution.

END OF ADDENDUM 3

ADDENDUM 3

(744-R1526 – Metropolitan Ethernet Services)

Page 1 of 6