Yes Scott. It was on topic and genuine in the approach, but understand the nuances around it. I did declare the interest in the second email when a more detailed explainer was included with a request to take it offline. That felt like I was stepping over the mark for the sake of pointing out the technical differences between peeringdb and XXXXXXXXXX hence the declaration and wanting to take it off line to not fill people's in-boxes.
That leads back to the first point to of doing it in the first place to avoid this. Apologies. Cheers [b] > On 13 Jul 2016, at 6:23 AM, Scott Weeks <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > ------------------------------------------ >> Might be worthwhile to also look at throwing your > fabric/IX on XXXXX www.xxxxxx.com . > ------------------------------------------ > > https://www.nanog.org/list > > "5.Product marketing is prohibited" > > It appears from a web search that you are affiliated > with the company you're speaking about. > > scott
