| Question |
: |
With respect to questions posed at the Wireless Pre-Bid meeting, I have reviewed notes with Douglas. The only questions we are aware of are the following:
1. For Group 5 (Air Cards/Modems) one vendor asked that we provide the specifications that define an FDLE approved device.
Persephone indicated that she would work with the M-DCPS Police department contacts to secure current requirements.
2. Vendors sought clarification on page 5 of 19 of the Bid Specifications the bullet on end-to-end security including anti-spam and anti-virus services, and again on 6 of 19 page in the Additional Features section the bullets for voice and fax support and SIM compatibility, as well as for the 4-wire headset connector (2.5mm) bullet in the Physical Features section.
We are not sure what context these statements are based on and recommend that Persephone reach out to her Metro-Dade contacts to see if they can provide details as to what they specifically intended the information to mean. If it does not pertain to our needs than it may actually be something that we can strike from the documents and move forward without.
Have the vendors submitted any additional questions since the pre-bid, or where there any questions you noted that we missed? If so, let me know ASAP and we will do whatever we can to assist
|
|
Answer |
: |
After a review, our existing police network architecture with FDLE was submitted by us and explicitly approved by them prior to its implementation.
Any change would require there review of a newly submitted infrastructure diagram, etc
Changes would also significantly impact our existing operations and its not known until specific architecture models are considered that we could project the impacted areas.
Some would include existing communication routes (public or private), VPN licenses, aircards, software, testing for drop spots, etcdevice compatibility across multiple end user devices, etc
|
Back to
Top