NVIDIA Enterprise Marketplace / Partner Network (NPN) as an acquisition channel

lead_time_weeks is null; what exists is a BOUND, not a figure, and it is a midpoint inference from NVIDIA's own filing rather than a published lead time. NVIDIA's FY2026 Form 10-K (source spl-nvda-10k-fy2026-supply-commitments) discloses $95.2bn of outstanding inventory purchase and long-term supply and capacity obligations 'of which substantially all will be paid through fiscal year 2027' as of 2026-01-25 - roughly four quarters, i.e. ~13 weeks - and states NVIDIA 'may place non-cancellable inventory orders IN ADVANCE OF OUR HISTORICAL LEAD TIMES'. Read that as a LOWER BOUND on a downstream buyer's wait, not an estimate of it. Recorded as midpoint-inference so it is never confused with a published week count, which is the conflation that makes rent-vs-buy arithmetic wrong.

EAR 742.6(a)(6)(iii)(A) + EAR 744.23 (Entity List) + EAR 744.6 (Unverified / MEU lists) + EAR Regional Stability (RS) controls for Country Groups D:1, D:4, D:5 (88 FR 73458, Oct 2023)

LAYER 1, EXPORT LICENCE: under the Jan 2026 BIS rule 91 FR 1684 (effective 2026-01-15) the license review policy for advanced-computing commodities with TPP < 21,000 AND total DRAM bandwidth < 6,500 GB/s - the NVIDIA H200 and AMD MI325X are the rule's named examples - moved from PRESUMPTION OF DENIAL to CASE-BY-CASE REVIEW, but only for exports FROM THE UNITED STATES to end users located in China or Macau, and only against six exporter certifications filed via SNAP-R before shipment: (1) items below the thresholds with the count of units shipped in the US; (2) sufficient US supply, judged 'taking into account normal lead times'; (3) no diversion of global foundry capacity away from US end users; (4) aggregate China+Macau shipments <= 50% of total US end-use shipments of that product; (5) no end-user or use prohibition; (6) the consignee runs rigorous KYC. Every shipment must then pass a qualified third-party testing lab - US-headquartered, not controlled by a D:5/Macau entity, no ownership stake in any party, qualification revocable by BIS at any time - verifying TPP, total DRAM bandwidth, interconnect bandwidth and copackaged DRAM capacity. Reexports and in-country transfers of the same chips to China/Macau REMAIN PRESUMPTION OF DENIAL. LAYER 2, END-USER AND PARENT SCREENING: per BIS guidance of 2026-05-31 a licence is required where the consignee is HEADQUARTERED in Country Group D:5 (15 CFR part 740 supplement no. 1) or Macau OR whose ULTIMATE PARENT COMPANY is so headquartered - even when the consignee itself sits outside D:5/Macau. The requirement sits at EAR 742.6(a)(6)(iii)(A) for destinations outside the US, with an exception available only under the license exception at 740.2(a)(9)(ii). The destination country alone therefore never answers the question; screen the parent. LAYER 3, REMAINING LIMITS: exports to D:5/Macau-headquartered OR -parented entities stay PRESUMPTION OF DENIAL wherever the buyer sits, and the AI Diffusion Rule that would have set a country-tier structure on who could lawfully buy what was RESCINDED on 2025-05-13 and is not being enforced, so any recorded status rests on the instruments named here rather than on tiering. UPGRADE NOTE: this record's earlier text cited only the Oct 2023 interim final rule (88 FR 73458) and a presumption of denial, with no paragraph and no mechanism. That is retained here as history: what changed is that the Jan 2026 rule (91 FR 1684) carved the TPP < 21,000 / DRAM < 6,500 GB/s band - which includes the H200 and MI325X on this record - out of presumption of denial into case-by-case review for US exports to China/Macau end users, and that BIS's 2026-05-31 guidance fixed the end-user/parent limb at 742.6(a)(6)(iii)(A).

QUOTE-ONLY by construction. Recorded separately from nvidia-dgx-direct because this is the ROUTING artefact rather than the hardware: marketplace.nvidia.com is where an enterprise actually finds the specific reseller, integrator or CSP that will sell it to them, and NVIDIA links to it as the 'Find a Partner' destination from the DGX page. Partner categories listed are Cloud Service Providers and Partner Servers, plus specializations that map to real buying needs (SuperPOD deployment expertise, DGX-Ready Lifecycle Management, colocation). Two consequences for anyone sourcing hardware: (1) the transacting legal entity is the partner, so warranty, support SLA and liability sit with them, not NVIDIA; (2) the directory is the practical place to see how many resellers a given country actually has, which is a real constraint on regional tenders. No public price anywhere on the directory. EXPORT CONTROLLED (true). Regime: US BIS advanced-computing export controls (the Oct 2023 interim final rule, 88 FR 73458 - source sup-buy-bis-2023-advanced-computing-controls), which put datacenter accelerators under ECCN 3A090/4A090, added the advanced-computing Foreign Direct Product (FDP) rule, and extended Regional Stability (RS) controls to Country Groups D:1, D:4 and D:5. For items destined to Macau or Country Group D:5 the rule applies a PRESUMPTION OF DENIAL; other RS destinations get a presumption of approval. Practical effect: which accelerator you can legally be sold, and which SKU counts as compliant, is set by destination and end user - not by the channel. LEAD TIME, recorded as an EXPLICIT NEGATIVE with a bound rather than a fabricated week count. NVIDIA publishes no lead time in weeks on any page, and this record is quote-only, so lead_time_weeks stays null: any number would be invented. What CAN be said from a primary source is the shape of the horizon. NVIDIA's FY2026 Form 10-K (filed 2026-02-25, source spl-nvda-10k-fy2026-supply-commitments) reports outstanding inventory purchase and long-term supply and capacity obligations of $95.2 BILLION as of 2026-01-25, 'of which substantially all will be paid through fiscal year 2027', against $21.4 billion of consolidated inventories. A forward book of that size against roughly one year of payments implies an order horizon on the order of several quarters, so plan in quarters rather than weeks. Two further reasons the true lead time is longer than any published figure: the 10-K states NVIDIA 'may place non-cancellable inventory orders for certain product components IN ADVANCE OF OUR HISTORICAL LEAD TIMES, pay premiums, or provide deposits to secure future supply and capacity' - the vendor itself buys beyond its own lead times - and supply is concentrated in TSMC/Samsung wafers, SK Hynix/Micron/Samsung memory, CoWoS packaging and Hon Hai/Wistron/Fabrinet assembly. Corroborating but NOT a substitute: CDW, one of the few distributors that prints a lead time, shows '4-6+ Weeks' for the NVIDIA DGX B200 8x180GB server (source spl-cdw-published-lead-times-gpu-2026-10) - that is CDW's inbound window on one SKU, an open-ended range, and it contradicts the multi-quarter horizon above, which is precisely why a distributor's number must not be read as the OEM's. Re-verify each quarter against a fresh 10-Q. EXPORT CONTROL REGIME: SCHEME RECLASSIFIED (2026-10-04): was a bare boolean plus 'EXPORT CONTROLLED (true). Regime: the Oct 2023 interim final rule, 88 FR 73458' with no paragraph, no mechanism and no expiry. Now recorded as a citation plus the three-layer mechanism.