Re: [atomic-devel] firewalld in atomic host

[Eric Paris <eparis redhat com>]

I question if we need firewalld in atomic. It could be a regular
container. Or a system container if we need it running before docker.

No?

Not sure who to ask to look at actually doing it. But yes, I think
everyone who has software doing automated updating of iptables rules
wants something like firewalld...

On Tue, 2017-04-25 at 09:24 -0400, Stephen Milner wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:31 AM, Fabian Deutsch <fdeutsch redhat com>
> wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:42 AM, Ben Breard <bbreard redhat com>
> > wrote:
> > > I'm starting to warm up to the idea of adding firewalld in Atomic
> > > Host. If
> > > we do this, it would be a requirement to clean up the absurd
> > > default zones &
> > > policies and have something relevant for AH out of the box.
> > 
> > +1
> > 
> > for AH, and to play nice with OCP/Kube by default - if used in that
> > use-case.
> > 
> > - fabian
> 
> I will admit, I do think it is easier to change Atomic Host to have
> firewalld than seemingly
> everyone else to move back to iptables. Adding Russell Teague from
> the
> openshift ansible
> side since he's done some firewalld/iptables work in this area.
>