On Wed, 8 Feb 2006, Martin Hannigan wrote: > Guys, are you being semantic? Yes, we're doggedly insisting that words mean what they're defined to mean, rather than the opposite. > You keep saying EMIX > and you're confusing me. Peering or no? "IX" naturally insinuates > yes regardless of neutrality. Exactly. "IX" as a component of a name is _intended to insinuate_ the availability of peering, _regardless of whether that's actually true or false_. Which is why we keep analogizing to the STIX, which was _called_ an IX, but was _not_ an IX, in that it had nothing to do with peering, only with a single provider's commercial transit product. The same is currently true throughout much of the Middle East. -Bill