Add client capability for not supporting overprovisioning.

[markdroth]

Signed-off-by: Mark D. Roth roth@google.com

Description: Add client capability for not supporting overprovisioning.
Risk Level: Low
Testing: N/A
Docs Changes: Included in PR
Release Notes: N/A

This should eliminate the need for #8093. And we can remove the disable_overprovisioning flag added in #8080, since it never got used. (I can add that to this PR if you'd like.)

@htuch @alyssawilk @snowp

[srini100]

/cc

[mattklein123]

Thanks LGTM, though I think needs a format/doc fix. Also, if the field will not be used, can you just go ahead and "deprecate" it from v2 and then it will be removed in v3? I think that's fine to do if it was never implemented. Thank you!

/wait

[repokitteh-read-only]

CC @envoyproxy/api-shepherds: Your approval is needed for changes made to api/.

🐱

Caused by: #10136 was synchronize by markdroth.

see: more, trace.

[markdroth]

I've marked the disable_overprovisioning field as deprecated.

I've attempted to fix the formatting. Let's see if the CI is happy...

[markdroth]

@mattklein123 The remaining CI failure seems like a bug in the formatter. It wants me to pull in the end of the table, but doing that would break the RST formatting. I'm not sure how to fix this. Can you (or someone who better understand the CI checks) please take a look? Thanks!

[mattklein123]

Sadly I don't know what the issue is and I don't have the cycles to debug it right now. @envoyproxy/maintainers is there anyone that can help look at this format check?

[markdroth]

I've punted by removing the table and replacing it with a bulleted list.

[mattklein123]

Thanks!