[RS-2577] Mention new GatewayAPI customization fields

[nelljerram]

No description provided.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for calico-docs-preview-next ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	8801038
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/calico-docs-preview-next/deploys/6870f6b5ed7fa000085256ac
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2102--calico-docs-preview-next.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview succeeded!

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	8801038
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/tigera/deploys/6870f6b5fda7900008b116df
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2102--tigera.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.
Lighthouse	1 paths audited Performance: 24 (🔴 down 2 from production) Accessibility: 90 (no change from production) Best Practices: 92 (no change from production) SEO: 92 (no change from production) PWA: - View the detailed breakdown and full score reports

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[ctauchen]

LGTM. Do these need to be moved also to OSS and CC?

[nelljerram]

Thanks @ctauchen . At time of writing this was intended for Enterprise and Cloud only, but the requirements position has changed and the changes should now be for OSS as well. So I will copy the changes across to OSS and CC.

[nelljerram]

@ctauchen I've just remembered that I meant to tag @apardeshi-tigera also to take a look at these docs. So let's hold off on merging until he has done that.

[ctauchen]

@nelljerram Why are we taking this out? This section is already live in the 3.30 docs.

[nelljerram]

Because we now have an official way to provision additional GatewayClasses, using the spec.gatewayClasses field.

[ctauchen]

Of course -- let me check where we are with Ash and we'll get this sorted out.

[nelljerram]

Many thanks @ctauchen .

[ctauchen]

@nelljerram I got the thumbs-up from Ash. If you can squash and sort your merge conflict, we can get this merged today.

[nelljerram]

@ctauchen Conflict is done. Is squashing essential? Personally I dislike it because it destroys the history of the conversation. But will if you insist. (Also not a fan of squash-merging because that leaves a branch in my local repo that appears to be unmerged - but I feel I'm losing the battle on that one.)

[apardeshi-tigera]

@nelljerram @ctauchen
For the 'Customization' part can we update to adopt following structure:

Section title: Gateway Customization:
Overview:
- Explaining that all gateway customization is done through a single GatewayAPI resource
- what fields are controlled : pods, load balancers, controller, multiple gateway classes
Example for common customization scenarios/use cases: Include YAML for each and kubectl for applying and verifying.
- Handle high traffic with multiple gateway pods and adequate resources. (replicas, memory)
- Set up external load balancers with cloud-specific features
- multiple gateway classes

[nelljerram]

@apardeshi-tigera The convention for section title is that it's a sentence beginning with an imperative verb, so I think we should stick to that.

For your "Overview", I think the only point that is not already covered is that it's done through a single GatewayAPI resource. If that's right, I'll propose a change to incorporate that.

For the Examples - yes, great idea to add those; I'll propose that shortly.

[nelljerram]

@apardeshi-tigera I've updated the PR per your comments now. Can you take another look at the calico-docs-preview-next preview and LMK what you think?

[apardeshi-tigera]

Looks good