Applying proxy-ssl-* directives on locations only

[janosi]

What this PR does / why we need it:

Currently we can define different proxy-ssl directives for the different locations of the same server if we have different Ingress definitions for those locations. However one of those proxy-ssl directives is also set on the common server level. It has the following problems:

• it is not possible to have locations with and without proxy-ssl configuration behind the same server. The server level proxy-ssl directives are used on those locations that anyway do not have such configuration in their Ingress definitions.
• the selection of the server level proxy-ssl parameters is a bit "random" when the different locations have different proxy-ssl config: the proxy-ssl-secret parameter first in the alphabetically ordered set of all the proxy-ssl-secrets is selected and configured on server level.
  This PR is o further enhance this logic, so it can provide a more user-controlled way of configuring the parameters either on location level, or on both server and location levels.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

Which issue/s this PR fixes

This PR implements a solution for the problem drafted in #4831

How Has This Been Tested?

Unit tests are added

Checklist:

• My change requires a change to the documentation.
• I have updated the documentation accordingly.
• I've read the CONTRIBUTION guide
• I have added tests to cover my changes.
• All new and existing tests passed.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @janosi. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes 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/test-infra repository.

[aledbf]

/ok-to-test

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #4981 into master will increase coverage by 2.75%.
The diff coverage is 66.66%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #4981      +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage   58.54%   61.3%   +2.75%     
=========================================
  Files          88      88              
  Lines        6737    8119    +1382     
=========================================
+ Hits         3944    4977    +1033     
- Misses       2363    2608     +245     
- Partials      430     534     +104

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
internal/ingress/controller/controller.go	53.43% <66.66%> (+3.12%)	⬆️
internal/ingress/annotations/mirror/main.go	83.87% <0%> (-16.13%)	⬇️
internal/ingress/annotations/opentracing/main.go	61.11% <0%> (-2.53%)	⬇️
cmd/nginx/flags.go	81.81% <0%> (-2.04%)	⬇️
internal/ingress/metric/collectors/process.go	88.8% <0%> (-1.62%)	⬇️
internal/ingress/controller/endpoints.go	93.33% <0%> (-0.42%)	⬇️
internal/ingress/annotations/parser/main.go	74.22% <0%> (+0.03%)	⬆️
internal/ingress/annotations/authreq/main.go	75.86% <0%> (+0.47%)	⬆️
internal/ingress/controller/template/configmap.go	78.11% <0%> (+0.7%)	⬆️
internal/ingress/metric/collectors/socket.go	79.93% <0%> (+0.87%)	⬆️
... and 6 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 19e9e9d...bc79fe1. Read the comment docs.

[janosi]

/retest

[janosi]

/retest

[janosi]

@aledbf Excuse me for my question, I am not familiar with the release process here, for example when a PR is merged. I can see that this one is removed from 0.29.0. Is there any blocking problem with this PR that I should solve? Thank you!

[aledbf]

/lgtm
/approve

[aledbf]

@janosi thanks!

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aledbf, janosi

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [aledbf]

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

[aledbf]

/retest