Align documentation about HTTPRouteTimeouts.BackendRequest timeout scope

[rtribotte]

What type of PR is this?

/kind documentation

What this PR does / why we need it:

This PR aligns the HTTPRouteTimeouts.BackendRequest timeout documentation. It is stated in the GEP 1742 sequence diagram illustrating the timeouts boundaries that the HTTPRouteTimeouts.BackendRequest timeout runs until the responses headers are received: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api/blob/f73504594cf85d36681e064d2932d66608d135e2/geps/gep-1742/index.md?plain=1#L358-L360

The documentation for the CRD was mentioning a timeout running until the end of the response, which is not consistent and this PR aims to align expectations.

On the side, in the GEP 1742, the Traefik mermaid sequence diagram is adjusted to reflect more accurately the actual supported timeouts.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Align documentation about HTTPRouteTimeouts.BackendRequest timeout scope.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @rtribotte. 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.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[youngnick]

/ok-to-test

This seems reasonable, but I'll need to have a think about it in case it counts as a breaking change.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@robscott: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: kate-osborn.

Note that only kubernetes-sigs members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

This seems like a significant change, would appreciate some additional reviews on this.

/cc @youngnick @howardjohn @arkodg @kate-osborn @mlavacca

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: rtribotte Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign thockin for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• geps/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[youngnick]

One small thing while we're fixing the last sequence diagram, but I think this looks as good as we can do given the multiple-datapath limitations.

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Close this PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Close this PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Reopen this PR with /reopen
• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@k8s-triage-robot: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Reopen this PR with /reopen
• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[nmengin]

Hey there,

Could you re-open the PR, please? We have applied the requested changes and are waiting for review on the PR.

Cc @youngnick