Well, we have two bits of information, one technical, that Boeing is seriously considering submitting both 767 and 777 proposals for its KCX bid (s):

A lot of the defense press was puzzled by Boeing’s statement last week after the release of the draft RFP. “Our next step is to conduct a detailed review of the document. We want to understand how requirements will be defined and prioritized and how the proposals will be evaluated. That information will help us decide which plane to offer or whether to offer both planes. We appreciate that there will be frequent, open discussion with the U.S. Air Force as we go forward. Both the Air Force and the American taxpayer will benefit from the tanker options we can offer. Boeing has a KC-7A7 ‘family of tankers’ available to meet the warfighter’s requirements. Whether it’s the agile, flexible 767-based tanker or the large 777-based tanker, Boeing will deliver a combat-ready tanker with maximum capability at the lowest cost.”

I don’t know if they will submit both aircraft, but my guess is that any new proposal for the 767 will involve a variant that has already been produced, perhaps either Japan’s or Italys, as opposed to the “767-200 fuselage, a -300 wing and a -400 cockpit,” variant that they proposed last time around.

My guess is also that they will back off on their “super” refueling boom, which has still not flown.

I think that any 777 proposal would have to involve a shortened fuselage, because they are looking at a medium tanker proposal, and the 777 is otherwise too big.

On the other end of the bid, Northrop Grumman/EADS is concerned that Boeing received proprietary price data on their bid when they filed the challenge, which will give Boeing an advantage in the next course of bidding. (also here and (here)

And then there is what effect, if any, there is on this process of Airbus losing the WTO ruling on subsidies, and how this might alter the bid process.