Hi @kl52752. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

/assign @robscott @arkodg @youngnick @shaneutt

/ok-to-test
/approve

@kl52752 I am looking for a solution where the same certificate is on two distinct listeners on a gateway. This is necessary because the Gateway API allows a single listener per gateway and the hostname for a listener can be either an FQDN or a wildcard FQDN. The behavior of wildcard certificates in TLS is that they match the apex (FQDN) or one label deep of wildcarded names.

Will this GEP address coalescing connections to prevent HTTP/2 connection reuse issues when mutual TLS (client certificates) are not involved and two listeners attached to a gateway share the same server certificate? [Perhaps there should be a test for this, if there isn't one]?

See also https://istio.io/latest/docs/ops/common-problems/network-issues/#404-errors-occur-when-multiple-gateways-configured-with-same-tls-certificate for how this impact users of the Istio controller for the Gateway API.

@kl52752 I am looking for a solution where the same certificate is on two distinct listeners on a gateway. This is necessary because the Gateway API allows a single listener per gateway and the hostname for a listener can be either an FQDN or a wildcard FQDN. The behavior of wildcard certificates in TLS is that they match the apex (FQDN) or one label deep of wildcarded names.

Will this GEP address coalescing connections to prevent HTTP/2 connection reuse issues when mutual TLS (client certificates) are not involved and two listeners attached to a gateway share the same server certificate? [Perhaps there should be a test for this, if there isn't one]?

See also https://istio.io/latest/docs/ops/common-problems/network-issues/#404-errors-occur-when-multiple-gateways-configured-with-same-tls-certificate for how this impact users of the Istio controller for the Gateway API.

hi @PT-GD in this GEP it is possible to attach the same FrontendValidation config (referencing the same ConfigMap) to 2 distinct Listeners in tlsPerPort field. The restriction here is that every port needs unique configuration but not the other way.
If they are listening on different port, you can do this by creating TLSConfig struct with the same FrontendTLSValidation but different port. If they are Listening on the same port only one FrontendTLSValidation is needed:
see the snippet:

apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1beta1
kind: Gateway
metadata:
  name: client-validation-basic
spec:
  gatewayClassName: acme-lb
  tls:
    defaultTLS: 
      caCertificateRefs:
        - kind: ConfigMap
          group: ""
          name: default-cert
        mode: AllowInsecureFallback
    tlsPerPort:
        - port: 443 // this configuration will apply to all Listeners matching this port
          frontendValidation:
            caCertificateRefs:
            - kind: ConfigMap
            group: ""
            name: foo-example-com-ca-cert
        - port: 8443 // If needed you can create second entry referencing the same ConfigMap for another port
          frontendValidation:
            caCertificateRefs:
            - kind: ConfigMap
            group: ""
            name: foo-example-com-ca-cert
            

/retest

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kl52752, robscott, youngnick

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

/retest

LGTM, thanks @kl52752

/unhold