each box will have control over its ability to route and its interface ip addresses, but thats about it.
+Why?
+====
+
+Most of what im trying to do here has been spawned by ipv6. With ipv6 (and more importantly dual-stack ipv6/v4, which will become
+common place) the need for a naming structure has become important. Also, the need to manage the address space has become even more
+critical cause iana are giving ipv6 addresses like they're candy.
+
+Anyways, when trying to implement dual-stack you get stuck in a situation of having to re-work everything cause you create rules
+for ipv4, then another set for ipv6. It gets more complicated by the fact that ipv6 gets a trillion ip's fore each host (ok so i am
+exajurating, but what i mean is that you have possibly a real address and a link local address on each interface).
+
+So this software will try and think of everything in terms of names... for eg a host will have a name "host" and a network
+might have a name "network", thus to define firewall rules we define the either host->network, network->host, host->host or
+network->network and then let the infrastructure turn the rules into valid objects.
\ No newline at end of file