Using firewalld instead of ufw

Ok, seems like a good idea (after having read a bit about firewalld + Debian, Fedora, see below).

What do you like better with firewalld / would you say doesn't work well with ufw + Docker?

Personally I remember I was confused about having to do this, with ufw:

# Make the firewall work with Docker: (not needed in Google Compute Engine)
# 1) Change forward policy to accept: DEFAULT_FORWARD_POLICY="ACCEPT"
sed -i 's/DEFAULT_FORWARD_POLICY="DROP"/#&\n# This makes Docker work:\nDEFAULT_FORWARD_POLICY="ACCEPT"/g' /etc/default/ufw

(in that start-firewall.sh script)

***

I websearched for "systemd firewall", and yes maybe firewalld is "the future" — from the Debian wiki:

... Debian Buster [i.e. Debian 10] ...
You should consider using a wrapper instead of writing your own firewalling scripts. It is recommended to run ?firewalld, which integrates pretty well into the system. See also https://firewalld.org/

https://wiki.debian.org/nftables

And an upvoted reply over at Reddit about ufw and firewalld:

firewalld is probably going to become the standard IPC interface to iptables

https://www.reddit.com/r/archlinux/comments/3aroy1/firewalld_vs_ufw/

***

I'll make a note about probably recommending firewalld instead, in Ty tech stack version 1. (Currently at version 0)

(I'll move this topic to the Ideas category. Update: I moved it back to Issues — there's a problem, see below)