docs: Fix links to nonexistent anchors (#3862)

Author: blake

geps/gep-1324/index.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ Gateway API represents the next generation of traffic routing APIs in Kubernetes
 
 ## Versioning
 
-Features or other modifications to the Gateway API spec that fall under this GEP will be subject to the same [versioning guidelines](../../concepts/versioning.md#graduation-criteria) as the rest of the Gateway API. For example, to move changes concerning a beta feature (e.g. HTTPRoute) from experimental to standard, all of the [beta criteria](../../concepts/versioning.md#experimental-standard) must be met (e.g. implemented by several implementations).
+Features or other modifications to the Gateway API spec that fall under this GEP will be subject to the same [versioning guidelines](../../concepts/versioning.md#graduation-criteria) as the rest of the Gateway API. For example, to move changes concerning a beta feature (e.g. HTTPRoute) from experimental to standard, all of the [graduation criteria](../../concepts/versioning.md#graduation-criteria) must be met (e.g. implemented by several implementations).
 
 ## Use-Cases
 

geps/gep-1619/index.md

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ Before this GEP graduates to Implementable, we must fulfill the following criter
     - **Answer**: Yes. We adjusted the API to use `BackendLBPolicy`. See [API](#api) for more details.
  2. Should we leave room for configuring different forms of Session Persistence?
     If so, what would that look like?
-    - **Answer**: Yes. See the [BackendLBPolicy API](#BackendLBPolicy-api) and [API Granularity](#api-granularity)
+    - **Answer**: Yes. See the [BackendLBPolicy API](#backendlbpolicy-api) and [API Granularity](#api-granularity)
       sections for more details.
  3. What name appropriately describe the API responsible for configuring load-balancing options for backend traffic?
     - **Answer**: We decided on `BackendLBPolicy` since it is aligned with `BackendTLSPolicy`, describes configuration
@@ -668,7 +668,7 @@ functionality of their applications.
 
 ### Prior Art
 
-Referring to our [Implementations](#Implementations) table on session persistence, the majority of Gateway API
+Referring to our [Implementations](#implementations) table on session persistence, the majority of Gateway API
 implementations designed session persistence in their APIs to be attached to a service or backends. This should be
 considered cautiously, as making associations to Gateway API's notion of Gateway, Route, and Service to other
 implementation's objects is hard to directly translate. The idea of a route in Gateway API is often not the same as a

geps/gep-1686/index.md

@@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ This testing plan specifies a new set of tests to define a "Mesh" [conformance p
 ## Focus
 
 Currently the GAMMA spec consists of two Gateway API GEPs [defining terminology and goals of Gateway API for service meshes](../gep-1324/index.md)
-and specifically [how route resources work in a service mesh context](/geps/gep-1426/).
+and specifically [how route resources work in a service mesh context](../gep-1294/index.md).
 The goal of the initial conformance testing is to check the essential behavior as defined by GEP-1426, as it differs from the wider Gateway API spec. This GEP focuses on using a `Service` object as an `xRoute` `parentRef` to control how the GAMMA implementation directs traffic to the endpoints specified by the `Services` in `backendRefs` and how the traffic is filtered and modified.
 
 ## Conformance Profile

geps/gep-1709/index.md

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ steps:
 
 1. select a [profile](#profiles)
 2. [integrate](#integration) tests in the downstream project
-3. [report results and get certified](#certification)
+3. [report results][#reporting-process] and get certified][#certification-process]
 
 The goal is to make selecting a conformance profile as simple and automatic of a
 process as feasible and support both the existing command line integration
@@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ for i := 0; i < len(tests.ConformanceTests); i++ {
 > but when used in conjunction with `Profile` this will result in a report that
 > the profile is not valid for reporting. Implementations in this state may be
 > able to report themselves as "in progress", see the
-> [certification section](#certification) for details.
+> [certification section](#certification-process) for details.
 
 Alternatively for an `Extended` conformance profile where not all of the
 features are implemented (as described in the [profiles](#profiles) section
@@ -234,7 +234,7 @@ support, or opt-out of the features you _don't_ support using
 `UnsupportedFeatures`.
 
 Once an implementation has integrated with the conformance test suite, they can
-move on to [certification](#certification) to report the results.
+move on to [certification](#certification-process) to report the results.
 
 [go-test]:https://go.dev/doc/tutorial/add-a-test
 [go]:https://go.dev

geps/gep-1867/index.md

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ This has been previously discussed in [this issue](https://github.com/kubernetes
 
 As a cluster scoped resource, `GatewayClass` does not meet this requirement.
 This restricts customization use cases to either a few pre-provisioned classes by the admin, or running in an environment where the "Infrastructure Provider" and "Cluster Operator" are the same roles.
-The distinction between these roles is explicitly called out on the [homepage](../../index.md#what-is-the-gateway-api).
+The distinction between these roles is explicitly called out on the [homepage](../../index.md#personas).
 
 ### Custom Resource
 

geps/gep-1897/index.md

@@ -405,8 +405,6 @@ the implementation would be required to fully implement the policy or mark the b
 
 [GEP-713: Metaresources and PolicyAttachment](../gep-713/index.md)
 
-[Policy Attachment](../../reference/policy-attachment.md#direct-policy-attachment)
-
 [Gateway API TLS](../../guides/tls.md)
 
 [SIG-NET Gateway API: TLS to the K8s.Service/Backend](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RTYh2brg_vLX9o3pTcrWxtZSsf8Y5NQvIG52lpFcZlo)

geps/gep-2722/index.md

@@ -387,7 +387,7 @@ distribution mechanisms will be provided:
   for visualizing data and presenting information in a visually appealing
   manner.
 * Evaluate how gwctl can be extended to support [Mesh use
-  cases](/concepts/gamma/#how-the-gateway-api-works-for-service-mesh)
+  cases](../../mesh/index.md)
 
 ## References
 

geps/gep-91/index.md

@@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ type GatewayTLSConfig struct {
     ......
     // FrontendValidation holds configuration information for validating the frontend (client).
     // Setting this field will require clients to send a client certificate
-    // required for validation during the TLS handshake. In browsers this may result in a dialog appearing 
+    // required for validation during the TLS handshake. In browsers this may result in a dialog appearing
     // that requests a user to specify the client certificate.
     // The maximum depth of a certificate chain accepted in verification is Implementation specific.
     FrontendValidation *FrontendTLSValidation `json:"frontendValidation,omitempty"`
@@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ This GEP aims to standardize this behavior as an official part of the upstream s
 
 [TLS Handshake Protocol]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5246#section-7.4
 [Certificate Path Validation]: https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5280#section-6
-[GatewayTLSConfig]: /references/spec/#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1.GatewayTLSConfig
+[GatewayTLSConfig]: ../../reference/spec.md#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1.GatewayTLSConfig
 [BackendTLSPolicy]: ../../api-types/backendtlspolicy.md
 [TLS Configuration GEP]: ../gep-2907/index.md
 [Gateway API TLS Use Cases]: https://docs.google.com/document/d/17sctu2uMJtHmJTGtBi_awGB0YzoCLodtR6rUNmKMCs8/edit?pli=1#heading=h.cxuq8vo8pcxm

geps/gep-995/index.md

@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ Add a new optional `name` field to the route rule types ([GRPCRouteRule](../../r
 
 ## Goals
 
-* Support referencing individual route rules by name from other resources, such as from metaresources ([GEP-2648](../gep-2648/index.md#apply-policies-to-sections-of-a-resource).)
+* Support referencing individual route rules by name from other resources, such as from metaresources ([GEP-2648](../gep-2648/index.md#section-names).)
 * Support referencing individual route rules by name from condition messages propagated in the status stanza of route resources as suggested in https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api/issues/1696#issuecomment-1666258188.
 * Support referencing individual route rules by name at other observability and networking tools that are part of the ecosystem based on Gateway API.
 * Provide a rather intuitive API for users of Kubernetes who are familiar with the same pattern employed already by other kinds of resources where lists of complex elements can be declared – e.g. service [ports](https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/service-resources/service-v1/#ServiceSpec), pod [containers](https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#containers) and pod [volumes](https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#volumes).

site-src/api-types/backendtlspolicy.md

@@ -139,10 +139,10 @@ Status defines the observed state of the BackendTLSPolicy and is not user-config
 way you do for other Gateway API objects to verify correct operation.  Note that the status in BackendTLSPolicy
 uses `PolicyAncestorStatus` to allow you to know which parentReference set that particular status.
 
-[backendtlspolicy]: /references/spec/#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicy
-[validation]: /references/spec/#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicy.Validation
-[caCertificateRefs]: /references/spec/#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicyValidation.CACertificateRefs
-[wellKnownCACertificates]: /references/spec/#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicyValidation.WellKnownCACertificates
-[hostname]: /references/spec/#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1.PreciseHostname
+[backendtlspolicy]: ../reference/spec.md#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicy
+[validation]: ../reference/spec.md#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicy.Validation
+[caCertificateRefs]: ../reference/spec.md#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicyValidation.CACertificateRefs
+[wellKnownCACertificates]: ../reference/spec.md#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha3.BackendTLSPolicyValidation.WellKnownCACertificates
+[hostname]: ../reference/spec.md#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1.PreciseHostname
 [rfc-3986]: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986
-[targetRefs]: /references/spec/#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha2.PolicyTargetReference
+[targetRefs]: ../reference/spec.md#gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha2.PolicyTargetReference