fix: allow hostname to use subdomain with single label/character

[nothinux]

Fixes #4793

Release Notes: No

[zhaohuabing]

@nothinux Thanks for fixing this! Could you please add a test to test/cel-validation/backend_test.go?

[nothinux]

added

[nothinux]

@zhaohuabing the coverage test failed because only 4 items are allowed. can we double this limit?

gateway/api/v1alpha1/backend_types.go

Lines 119 to 121 in a383dd9

	// +kubebuilder:validation:MaxItems=4
	// +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.all(f, has(f.fqdn)) || !self.exists(f, has(f.fqdn))",message="fqdn addresses cannot be mixed with other address types"
	Endpoints []BackendEndpoint `json:"endpoints,omitempty"`

[zhaohuabing]

@zhaohuabing the coverage test failed because only 4 items are allowed. can we double this limit?

gateway/api/v1alpha1/backend_types.go

Lines 119 to 121 in a383dd9

	// +kubebuilder:validation:MaxItems=4
	// +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.all(f, has(f.fqdn)) || !self.exists(f, has(f.fqdn))",message="fqdn addresses cannot be mixed with other address types"
	Endpoints []BackendEndpoint `json:"endpoints,omitempty"`

I think it's fine to make it 8 cc @guydc

[arkodg]

@zhaohuabing the coverage test failed because only 4 items are allowed. can we double this limit?

gateway/api/v1alpha1/backend_types.go

Lines 119 to 121 in a383dd9

	// +kubebuilder:validation:MaxItems=4
	// +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.all(f, has(f.fqdn)) || !self.exists(f, has(f.fqdn))",message="fqdn addresses cannot be mixed with other address types"
	Endpoints []BackendEndpoint `json:"endpoints,omitempty"`

I think it's fine to make it 8 cc @guydc

64, so it account for cases where users are auto generating Backend resources to route to custom backends ? Can we do that in a separate PR @nothinux ?

[nothinux]

@arkodg I've created separate PR to Increase it #4822

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 66.28%. Comparing base (2385672) to head (6030b6c).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #4803      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   66.25%   66.28%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         209      209              
  Lines       31922    31922              
==========================================
+ Hits        21149    21159      +10     
+ Misses       9524     9517       -7     
+ Partials     1249     1246       -3     

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

[zirain]

can you run make -k gen-check to make CI happy?

[nothinux]

gen-check was fine, not sure why it's failing on lint.shellcheck

[zirain]

gen-check was fine, not sure why it's failing on lint.shellcheck

I believed crd files should be updated?

[zhaohuabing]

@nothinux

test/cel-validation/backend_test.go:90: File is not gci-ed with --skip-generated -s standard -s default -s prefix(github.com/envoyproxy/gateway) (gci)

[nothinux]

test/cel-validation/backend_test.go:90: File is not gci-ed with --skip-generated -s standard -s default -s prefix(github.com/envoyproxy/gateway) (gci)

Thanks for pointing that out, updated

[zhaohuabing]

LGTM thanks!