fail2ban + firewalld suggestions needed

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 11:09:31PM -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> - Do we do this by default, because firewalld is the default firewall in
> Fedora?  I would not want to require firewalld though because fail2ban
> can work perfectly fine without it, so it would be broken by default on
> systems without firewalld installed (or enabled).

I'm not a fan of that, as it goes from default to mandatory more quickly
than it should.

> - Stick it in a fail2ban-firewalld sub-package that requires firewalld.
>  Downside is that people need to figure out that they really should
> install this for default installs.  Upside is it is easier to use
> without firewalld (don't need to find and remove the
> fedora-firewalld.conf file).

This gets my vote. An alternate approach would be to make fail2ban be a
virtual package that requires fail2ban-firewalld and a new fail2ban-server
subpackage which contains the actual thing.

-- 
Matthew Miller    --   Fedora Project    --    <mattdm at fedoraproject.org>