Acts 28:
[16] And when we came into Rome, Paul was allowed to stay by himself, with the soldier that guarded him.
[17] After three days he called together the local leaders of the Jews; and when they had gathered, he said to them, "Brethren, though I had done nothing against the people or the customs of our fathers, yet I was delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans.[16] And when we came into Rome, Paul was allowed to stay by himself, with the soldier that guarded him.
[18] When they had examined me, they wished to set me at liberty, because there was no reason for the death penalty in my case.
[19] But when the Jews objected, I was compelled to appeal to Caesar -- though I had no charge to bring against my nation.
[20] For this reason therefore I have asked to see you and speak with you, since it is because of the hope of Israel that I am bound with this chain."
[21] And they said to him, "We have received no letters from Judea about you, and none of the brethren coming here has reported or spoken any evil about you.
[22] But we desire to hear from you what your views are; for with regard to this sect we know that everywhere it is spoken against."
[23] When they had appointed a day for him, they came to him at his lodging in great numbers. And he expounded the matter to them from morning till evening, testifying to the kingdom of God and trying to convince them about Jesus both from the law of Moses and from the prophets.
[24] And some were convinced by what he said, while others disbelieved.
So is it out of the realm of possibility that he preached to the Gentiles there? I ask because I understood Diego1618 to say that Peter would have had "no business" preaching to Gentiles in Rome because that was Paul's mission. Diego, feel free to correct me if I'm mischaracterizing here.