The short answer is transparency and documentation. If you refer to some of the attachments that I included in response to the committee's request, we intend to be very transparent with you, with the vendor community and with all Canadians about what we inherited, where we are today and where we want to be moving forward.
We will also work with industry so that it understands what our objectives are and why, so that companies can think about the technologies they are developing, and we can integrate them into our forward procurements. We are also moving to open source, which will make it easier for us to allow more vendors into that ecosystem.
That, frankly, is not always a guarantee that different vendors will win. We've done two open, generic procurements, and one happened to be won by Cisco, a company that is the subject of a lot of attention here. Another one was won by Juniper.
We will be open and transparent. We will consult with industry on what we need and why. We will invite industry to help us refine our technology requirements to take advantage of state-of-the-art technologies moving forward, and we will be moving to the more open-source, software-defined, zero-trust types of networks that Gartner speaks to. Every one of our actions will be fully transparent.
The final thing I will say is that, in line with the recommendations from Gartner, oftentimes we get requirements from departments saying we have to go sole source. It has to be plug and play. They can't accept anything else, because the risk is too high. We've implemented a review committee that looks at each and every one of those, and challenges those requirements to make sure that they are what is claimed.
If it has to be specific, because it's plug and play, the risk is too high or timing, we will accept that and we'll be transparent about it. When it's not, we have a better process now to push back, rather than simply accept because they say it must be sole sourced. We now challenge each and every one of those.