Support configurable hostPort in helm chart

[Gasoid]

Proposed changes

hostPort field for nginx container is configurable

Problem: hostPort is not configurable for now

Solution: In values file were added hostPort section

Testing: Tested manually.

Closes #2933

Checklist

Before creating a PR, run through this checklist and mark each as complete.

• I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have checked that all unit tests pass after adding my changes
• I have updated necessary documentation
• I have rebased my branch onto main
• I will ensure my PR is targeting the main branch and pulling from my branch from my own fork

Release notes

NONE

[nginx-bot]

Hi @Gasoid! Welcome to the project! 🎉

Thanks for opening this pull request!
Be sure to check out our Contributing Guidelines while you wait for someone on the team to review this.

[github-actions]

✅ All required contributors have signed the F5 CLA for this PR. Thank you!
_{Posted by the CLA Assistant Lite bot.}

[Gasoid]

I have hereby read the F5 CLA and agree to its terms

[bjee19]

Hey @Gasoid thanks for opening up this PR! We're going to hold off on this change right now because our architecture is changing in our next release (2.0) and there will be a different way to specify fields on the nginx container.

We are about to merge our feature branch change/control-data-plane-split into main, hopefully within the next week, and when that happens these changes would no longer work.

So after we merge our feature branch you could rewrite this PR to fit the new changes, it would probably look something like this PR #3319, OR we can probably just tag it alongside this issue #3240 which we'll complete by our 2.0 release.

We're fine either way, so please let us know what you'd like to do!

[Gasoid]

@bjee19 thx, i will take care of #3240
according to you, all issues with label "good first issue" are not needed to start doing?
e.g. i would like to do #3157 as well

[bjee19]

Hey @Gasoid, thanks for offering to do #3240, however that won't be necessary. That specific story is already scheduled in our current sprint so one of our team members will already be handling that. However, modifying this open PR after we merge our control data plane split changes into main is still an option and would be greatly appreciated to close out #2933.

according to you, all issues with label "good first issue" are not needed to start doing?

That sort of depends, we're in a tricky spot right now where we're just wrapping up our changes to release our 2.0 with major changes to our architecture, so it just means that the solution to some of these stories might change slightly. However after we merge our changes into main in this open PR (should be by next week), all these issues are good to go.

e.g. i would like to do #3157 as well

#3157 looks like a great issue that won't be affected too much with the changes coming in so you could start on that. There just might be some additional places to update after #3318 goes in.