DVS II. Is it ever going to come online??? [Archive] - VTCTalk.com

channelmaster23

05-05-2009, 09:47 AM

Looks like the hammer has fallen and we won't be seeing DVS-II anytime soon. seems as though Uncle Sugar has had enough and didn't renew the contract. Word has it that employees were escorted to the door. Ouch!

leprechaun

05-05-2009, 09:51 AM

Wow. Could be a blow to my pals in RADVISION.

Sean Lessman

05-05-2009, 10:06 AM

Wow. Could be a blow to my pals in RADVISION.

Wasn't that a 'Cisco win'?

Sean

leprechaun

05-05-2009, 10:12 AM

Yes. But all the VideoConferencing infrastructure was RADVISION stuff, branded with Cisco logo.

channelmaster23

05-05-2009, 10:24 AM

Yep, Radvision took a big hit. Seems like only one guy survived.

BasicITOne

05-07-2009, 03:35 PM

Ok so now what?

What happened to the millions of dollars awarded to the contractors?

What did the warfighters and taxpayers get for their money over the last few years?

Sean Lessman

05-07-2009, 05:32 PM

Ok so now what?

What happened to the millions of dollars awarded to the contractors?

What did the warfighters and taxpayers get for their money over the last few years?

Maybe you should ask Cisco that question. It would be interesting to hear what is going on.

Sean

THOMASMILLER28

05-11-2009, 06:19 AM

Yep, Radvision took a big hit. Seems like only one guy survived.

LBJ! LBJ!You know who you are, the lone survivor!:rambo:

buchu70

05-13-2009, 09:51 AM

Fellow DVS Stakeholders--

Per information given at the last COI Mgr Meeting and at the DISA Partnership Conference--we owe you an update regarding DVS-II. Here is
the latest information:

The DVS-II effort has been stopped so that we may revamp video and collaboration requirements thereby bringing our customers' quality collaboration services that are user-friendly and scale easily. We will have a more specified way ahead NLT 30 June 09. Until then, please retain your 1841 routers and continue with your DVS-G accreditations as required. Purchase of the AIMS Module should be placed on-hold until we provide further detail on the way ahead in June. We will host a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) service on DVS-WS.

Nubio

05-13-2009, 10:48 AM

lol. I used to work for both the Atlanta and Pearl harbor hubs, and was on-site when they began selecting the ground sites for the actual new hubs.

It was a mess then, and it looks like it is still a mess now. The system they have now in place is perfectly fine, although in need a few upgrades (imo). ;)

channelmaster23

05-26-2009, 11:19 AM

The June COI Managers meeting will be one that should be very interesting.

What's a button 3?

11B-33T

05-28-2009, 11:34 AM

Fellow DVS Stakeholders--

UNSAT..cutting and pasting this on a public forum. This was sent out via email FOUO and contains no classified info, but it was addressed to parties who are impacted by the turn of events.

It should not have made its way onto here...

BasicITOne

06-01-2009, 07:27 PM

DVS-II is terminated and there wasn't already a plan to replace it?

That tells me the decision happened quickly and something or someone made it happen.

Does anyone know why this failed?

DVSG has been running for years and DVS-II was just an upgrade.

Where did it go wrong?

videojunkie1208

06-02-2009, 06:46 AM

Short answer - Cisco got involved in something that they didn't really understand because there was money to be made, and the Gov't folks bought it cause it was Cisco (a brand trusted for IP stuff) instead of working with a vendor that actually does vtc.

BasicITOne

06-02-2009, 06:10 PM

This made big news on Cisco's Radvision's NG's and ATT's website. But the project closure is only being reported here. Not even the DVS website mentions it.

Man whoever wrote that contract where they could take a 100M and not have to produce anything and not have to repay a dime must be a genius.

sorry but i really wanted to see this program work and now after years of waiting to have it end like this is maddening. I like Cisco for networking and I like Radvision for the ViaIp gateway and the ECS.

But I have to agree that not a single company in the list was the best choice to provide a video network.

What I don't understand is why with all the smart folks at DISA, Cisco, Radvision, ATT, SAIC, and NG no body called one or both of the top video communication campanies for help? if that would have made someone look bad, how bad does it look now.

Nubio

06-09-2009, 01:04 PM

Although i'm pretty certain that more than a few things changed since my departure, the general idea that was floated to us techs in the original DVS-I project was that this "upgrade" was in many respects more of a overhaul.

We're talking about closing and opening brand new hubs with completely new setups in many respects.

Now like i said, my information is more than a bit out-dated but to say that the DVS-II phase was just a mere "upgrade" is a little bit vague, however I more than happily defer to the current team members (who are obviously on here in some form).

The current DVS-I setup is more than adaquete given that so many of their customers are still ISDN based connections... now if they have migrated everyone to T-1's at this point, then the bridges definitely need some upgrades and re-design. :bandit:

channelmaster23

07-09-2009, 09:41 AM

Just got word that the Germany hub has gone black. All the DVS II equipment is now turned OFF.

The end to a serious waste of government money and manpower.

What's next???

videojunkie1208

07-09-2009, 12:05 PM

The rest of us are working with vendors that do H.460/18/19 Firewall traversal so that we can mainatin secure VRF's and control who we talk to, and are creating a working interoperability system.

Unfortunately by the time DVS-whatever catches up we'll all be running SIP and talking to each other through a mix of VTC devices, VOIP phones, and Find Me solutions...

I read the recent STIG that went out, and DISA refuses to realize that VTC endpoints are now just another VOIP device. IMO they are out of touch with the current technology, and the direction that the technology is heading...

(some specifics: individual user logons for VTC endpoint - do I need a login for my PHONE? / scheduled conferences run by a scheduler - how about a system that automatically creates conferences on the fly and allows users to control their own conferences?)

Will they (DISA) catch on?... I hope so, but primarily so that there is a direction, and we don't wind up with 3000 organizations implementing individual solutions that are not compatible...

MaxLiao

07-29-2009, 08:59 PM

I can tell you that many, many decisions about DVS-II were questionable at best. Radvision took the heat for many things they shouldn't have because people kept throwing monkey-wrenches into the mix and expected Radvion to come up with the fixes. I won't say that Radvision was a perfect beast in this, but they get way more blame than they should.

I hate to say this, but some of the DC-area DISA personnel (and buddy-buddy DVS-G contractors) they had 'lead' this thing are not knowledgable about Video Conferencing - or let their biases cloud their judgement toward certain solutions and/or vendors. Politics and favortism in a government contract? NEVER! ;)

I'm not sure if I'm allowed to say this, but I'm bitter so ;) ... just one example from my mind that caused no end of trouble was MeetingPace. If we could have gotten away from that craptastic application (or maybe used a newer version), we could have cured many issues right there.

But, it's over ... we've moved on(?) ... best of luck to everyone. :p-

channelmaster23

08-06-2009, 01:52 PM

Man, I couldn't have said it better myself. I think you really nailed it.

Too many good-ole-boy, hook-a-brutha up, que pasa amigo situations in the whole DVS-II "adventure" spelled doom right from the get go.

Like you we'll file it away and wait and see what comes down the pike next.

BTW, last Radvision guy flies from Germany this week.

Sean Lessman

08-06-2009, 02:15 PM

Radvision took the heat for many things...

Wasn't this a 'Cisco' deal? Sounds like it is Cisco technology when it is working well and it is RADVision technology when it isn't ;)

Sean

MaxLiao

08-06-2009, 06:39 PM

BTW, last Radvision guy flies from Germany this week.
I know that 'Germany Guy' very well.

Cisco and Radvision are partners - for better or for worse - so, in this, they are kind of one and the same. The only reason I separate them is because (from my perspective) Radvision really bent over backward for the government and their schenanagins. When we (the DVS-II operators) asked for some simple tweaks from Cisco, they'd simply say, "No, this is how it works; this is how you'll have to use it."

We came up with a few work arounds of our own (that worked very well) to bypass certain issues, but they would not fly in the face of the contract so ... :speechles ... you know the rest.

channelmaster23

08-07-2009, 12:06 PM

Yeah, me and that "Gemany guy" have been through a lot together. He's a great friend.

I've always suspected that the Cisco guys were the root of the problem. It seems as though they kinda hog-tied the Radvision crew and wouldn't let them work through issues.

I guess it really doesn't matter now since it's a dead horse now.

MaxLiao

10-01-2009, 03:08 PM

... asked for some simple tweaks from Cisco, they'd simply say, "No, this is how it works; this is how you'll have to use it."

I know this isn't really DVS II related, but I hope that Tandberg can avoid this mentality from Cisco. I'm not for or against any vendor, but I'm most versed with Tandberg, and I'd hate to see an uncooperative support mentality take over a company that's always provided good support (in my experience).

ipguy

12-07-2009, 07:03 AM

If you only knew the whole story.

haneyr

01-12-2010, 05:01 PM

When I first heard the DVSG-II design proposal I knew it was dead from the start. To think that all VTC's world wide could go IP only was a no starter.

But I do have to thank DISA and their excellent DVSG customer support for giving me more customers willing to spend money on their own hubs and infrastructure systems. Between them and hub site operators that refuse to automate their hubs and provide what the customers want I am still in business and doing well.

BasicITOne

01-25-2010, 02:56 AM

Wasn't this a 'Cisco' deal? Sounds like it is Cisco technology when it is working well and it is RADVision technology when it isn't ;)

Sean

Cisco and Radvision made very public statements about this big win back in 2005 but absolutely nothing from Cisco, Radvision, or DISA publicly about how the failure of the project wasted 100+ million dollars of Taxpayer money and has given no reason way or a way to make it right.