Clarify Gateway Listener Distinct definitions (#3477)

* Clarify Gateway Listener Distinct definitions

Signed-off-by: Nick Young <[email protected]>

* Update with PR comments

Signed-off-by: Nick Young <[email protected]>

---------

Signed-off-by: Nick Young <[email protected]>

Author: youngnick

apis/v1/gateway_types.go

@@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ type GatewaySpec struct {
 	// logical endpoints that are bound on this Gateway's addresses.
 	// At least one Listener MUST be specified.
 	//
+	// ## Distinct Listeners
+	//
 	// Each Listener in a set of Listeners (for example, in a single Gateway)
 	// MUST be _distinct_, in that a traffic flow MUST be able to be assigned to
 	// exactly one listener. (This section uses "set of Listeners" rather than
@@ -80,74 +82,103 @@ type GatewaySpec struct {
 	// combination of Port, Protocol, and, if supported by the protocol, Hostname.
 	//
 	// Some combinations of port, protocol, and TLS settings are considered
-	// Core support and MUST be supported by implementations based on their
-	// targeted conformance profile:
+	// Core support and MUST be supported by implementations based on the objects
+	// they support:
 	//
-	// HTTP Profile
+	// HTTPRoute
 	//
 	// 1. HTTPRoute, Port: 80, Protocol: HTTP
 	// 2. HTTPRoute, Port: 443, Protocol: HTTPS, TLS Mode: Terminate, TLS keypair provided
 	//
-	// TLS Profile
+	// TLSRoute
 	//
 	// 1. TLSRoute, Port: 443, Protocol: TLS, TLS Mode: Passthrough
 	//
 	// "Distinct" Listeners have the following property:
 	//
-	// The implementation can match inbound requests to a single distinct
-	// Listener. When multiple Listeners share values for fields (for
+	// **The implementation can match inbound requests to a single distinct
+	// Listener**.
+	//
+	// When multiple Listeners share values for fields (for
 	// example, two Listeners with the same Port value), the implementation
 	// can match requests to only one of the Listeners using other
 	// Listener fields.
 	//
-	// For example, the following Listener scenarios are distinct:
+	// When multiple listeners have the same value for the Protocol field, then
+	// each of the Listeners with matching Protocol values MUST have different
+	// values for other fields.
+	//
+	// The set of fields that MUST be different for a Listener differs per protocol.
+	// The following rules define the rules for what fields MUST be considered for
+	// Listeners to be distinct with each protocol currently defined in the
+	// Gateway API spec.
+	//
+	// The set of listeners that all share a protocol value MUST have _different_
+	// values for _at least one_ of these fields to be distinct:
+	//
+	// * **HTTP, HTTPS, TLS**: Port, Hostname
+	// * **TCP, UDP**: Port
+	//
+	// One **very** important rule to call out involves what happens when an
+	// implementation:
 	//
-	// 1. Multiple Listeners with the same Port that all use the "HTTP"
-	//    Protocol that all have unique Hostname values.
-	// 2. Multiple Listeners with the same Port that use either the "HTTPS" or
-	//    "TLS" Protocol that all have unique Hostname values.
-	// 3. A mixture of "TCP" and "UDP" Protocol Listeners, where no Listener
-	//    with the same Protocol has the same Port value.
+	// * Supports TCP protocol Listeners, as well as HTTP, HTTPS, or TLS protocol
+	//   Listeners, and
+	// * sees HTTP, HTTPS, or TLS protocols with the same `port` as one with TCP
+	//   Protocol.
 	//
-	// Some fields in the Listener struct have possible values that affect
-	// whether the Listener is distinct. Hostname is particularly relevant
-	// for HTTP or HTTPS protocols.
+	// In this case all the Listeners that share a port with the
+	// TCP Listener are not distinct and so MUST NOT be accepted.
 	//
-	// When using the Hostname value to select between same-Port, same-Protocol
-	// Listeners, the Hostname value must be different on each Listener for the
-	// Listener to be distinct.
+	// If an implementation does not support TCP Protocol Listeners, then the
+	// previous rule does not apply, and the TCP Listeners SHOULD NOT be
+	// accepted.
 	//
-	// When the Listeners are distinct based on Hostname, inbound request
+	// Note that the `tls` field is not used for determining if a listener is distinct, because
+	// Listeners that _only_ differ on TLS config will still conflict in all cases.
+	//
+	// ### Listeners that are distinct only by Hostname
+	//
+	// When the Listeners are distinct based only on Hostname, inbound request
 	// hostnames MUST match from the most specific to least specific Hostname
 	// values to choose the correct Listener and its associated set of Routes.
 	//
-	// Exact matches must be processed before wildcard matches, and wildcard
-	// matches must be processed before fallback (empty Hostname value)
+	// Exact matches MUST be processed before wildcard matches, and wildcard
+	// matches MUST be processed before fallback (empty Hostname value)
 	// matches. For example, `"foo.example.com"` takes precedence over
 	// `"*.example.com"`, and `"*.example.com"` takes precedence over `""`.
 	//
 	// Additionally, if there are multiple wildcard entries, more specific
 	// wildcard entries must be processed before less specific wildcard entries.
 	// For example, `"*.foo.example.com"` takes precedence over `"*.example.com"`.
+	//
 	// The precise definition here is that the higher the number of dots in the
 	// hostname to the right of the wildcard character, the higher the precedence.
 	//
 	// The wildcard character will match any number of characters _and dots_ to
 	// the left, however, so `"*.example.com"` will match both
 	// `"foo.bar.example.com"` _and_ `"bar.example.com"`.
 	//
+	// ## Handling indistinct Listeners
+	//
 	// If a set of Listeners contains Listeners that are not distinct, then those
-	// Listeners are Conflicted, and the implementation MUST set the "Conflicted"
+	// Listeners are _Conflicted_, and the implementation MUST set the "Conflicted"
 	// condition in the Listener Status to "True".
 	//
+	// The words "indistict" and "conflicted" are considered equivalent for the
+	// purpose of this documentation.
+	//
 	// Implementations MAY choose to accept a Gateway with some Conflicted
 	// Listeners only if they only accept the partial Listener set that contains
-	// no Conflicted Listeners. To put this another way, implementations may
-	// accept a partial Listener set only if they throw out *all* the conflicting
-	// Listeners. No picking one of the conflicting listeners as the winner.
-	// This also means that the Gateway must have at least one non-conflicting
-	// Listener in this case, otherwise it violates the requirement that at
-	// least one Listener must be present.
+	// no Conflicted Listeners.
+	//
+	// Specifically, an implementation MAY accept a partial Listener set subject to
+	// the following rules:
+	//
+	// * The implementation MUST NOT pick one conflicting Listener as the winner.
+	//   ALL indistinct Listeners must not be accepted for processing.
+	// * At least one distinct Listener MUST be present, or else the Gateway effectively
+	//   contains _no_ Listeners, and must be rejected from processing as a whole.
 	//
 	// The implementation MUST set a "ListenersNotValid" condition on the
 	// Gateway Status when the Gateway contains Conflicted Listeners whether or
@@ -156,7 +187,25 @@ type GatewaySpec struct {
 	// Accepted. Additionally, the Listener status for those listeners SHOULD
 	// indicate which Listeners are conflicted and not Accepted.
 	//
-	// A Gateway's Listeners are considered "compatible" if:
+	// ## General Listener behavior
+	//
+	// Note that, for all distinct Listeners, requests SHOULD match at most one Listener.
+	// For example, if Listeners are defined for "foo.example.com" and "*.example.com", a
+	// request to "foo.example.com" SHOULD only be routed using routes attached
+	// to the "foo.example.com" Listener (and not the "*.example.com" Listener).
+	//
+	// This concept is known as "Listener Isolation", and it is an Extended feature
+	// of Gateway API. Implementations that do not support Listener Isolation MUST
+	// clearly document this, and MUST NOT claim support for the
+	// `GatewayHTTPListenerIsolation` feature.
+	//
+	// Implementations that _do_ support Listener Isolation SHOULD claim support
+	// for the Extended `GatewayHTTPListenerIsolation` feature and pass the associated
+	// conformance tests.
+	//
+	// ## Compatible Listeners
+	//
+	// A Gateway's Listeners are considered _compatible_ if:
 	//
 	// 1. They are distinct.
 	// 2. The implementation can serve them in compliance with the Addresses
@@ -171,13 +220,6 @@ type GatewaySpec struct {
 	// on the same address, or cannot mix HTTPS and generic TLS listens on the same port
 	// would not consider those cases compatible, even though they are distinct.
 	//
-	// Note that requests SHOULD match at most one Listener. For example, if
-	// Listeners are defined for "foo.example.com" and "*.example.com", a
-	// request to "foo.example.com" SHOULD only be routed using routes attached
-	// to the "foo.example.com" Listener (and not the "*.example.com" Listener).
-	// This concept is known as "Listener Isolation". Implementations that do
-	// not support Listener Isolation MUST clearly document this.
-	//
 	// Implementations MAY merge separate Gateways onto a single set of
 	// Addresses if all Listeners across all Gateways are compatible.
 	//