CP/DP Split: Update documentation on accessing nginx container

[bjee19]

Proposed changes

Update documentation on accessing nginx container

Problem: With our incoming changes to our control data plane split, the nginx container will no longer be in the NGF Pod. Thus all documentation on accessing the nginx container (logs, sending traffic, config...) need to be updated.

Solution: Updated the documentation. Mainly, when sending traffic in the examples, the host and IP of the NGINX Service are recorded after the Gateway is deployed. Most of these changes are in our examples.

Testing: Display of markdown files looks good.

Closes

Checklist

Before creating a PR, run through this checklist and mark each as complete.

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have checked that all unit tests pass after adding my changes
• I have updated necessary documentation
• I have rebased my branch onto main
• I will ensure my PR is targeting the main branch and pulling from my branch from my own fork

Release notes

If this PR introduces a change that affects users and needs to be mentioned in the release notes,
please add a brief note that summarizes the change.

[bjee19]

There is this document about debugging through an ephemeral container which doesn't work anymore, should I update it in this pr? https://github.com/nginx/nginx-gateway-fabric/blob/main/docs/developer/debugging.md

I'm not sure if it even works as an idea anymore.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 86.62%. Comparing base (6337c97) to head (7372c77).
Report is 267 commits behind head on change/control-data-plane-split.

Additional details and impacted files

@@                         Coverage Diff                         @@
##           change/control-data-plane-split    #3338      +/-   ##
===================================================================
- Coverage                            89.74%   86.62%   -3.13%     
===================================================================
  Files                                  109      129      +20     
  Lines                                11150    14827    +3677     
  Branches                                50       62      +12     
===================================================================
+ Hits                                 10007    12844    +2837     
- Misses                                1083     1834     +751     
- Partials                                60      149      +89     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[ADubhlaoich]

Generally LGTM!

Is there a desire for these examples to be "converted" into production docs?

I did something similar for NIC once, here's the PR and current files for context:

nginx/kubernetes-ingress#6572
https://github.com/nginx/kubernetes-ingress/tree/main/examples/custom-resources/access-control
https://docs.nginx.com/nginx-ingress-controller/configuration/access-control/

[bjee19]

@ADubhlaoich I'm not too sure, I know that at least one of these examples (https-termination) has an example here in this repo, but also has a dedicated document in the production docs. I think that this discussion has come up before, but i forgot what the conclusion was, maybe something along the lines of "why not keep it there for any devs".

@sjberman @ciarams87 @salonichf5 anyone have other thoughts?

[sjberman]

I think the idea was to leave the YAMLs in the repo but get rid of the READMEs in favor of the production docs, so we don't have duplicate instructions that may drift.

[bjee19]

@sjberman, do you think I should get rid of the https-termination readme, but keep the others since they don't have prod docs?

[sjberman]

I'm good with that.

[ciarams87]

👍🏼

[bjee19]

@ADubhlaoich , I suppose converting some of these other examples to production docs just isn't too high of a priority for us, so we can put that off for now.

[sjberman]

We should probably keep a basic README here pointing to the docs, similar to the other examples that do that.

[bjee19]

good catch, thanks