Operator concept document has contradicting statements w.r.t. `virtual-garden-kube-apiserver` service type

[Vladimir Nachev]

How to categorize this issue?

/area documentation
/kind bug

What happened:

gardener/docs/concepts/operator.md

Lines 111 to 112 in a55d180

 The `virtual-garden-kube-apiserver` `Deployment` is exposed via a `Service` of type `LoadBalancer` with the same name. 
 In the future, we will switch to exposing it via Istio, similar to how the `kube-apiservers` of shoot clusters are exposed. 

and

gardener/docs/concepts/operator.md

Line 125 in a55d180

 **The respective DNS record is not managed by `gardener-operator` and should be manually created and pointed to the load balancer IP of the `virtual-garden-kube-apiserver` `Service`.** 

vs.

gardener/docs/concepts/operator.md

Lines 322 to 324 in a55d180

 The `virtual-garden-kube-apiserver` is exposed via a dedicated `istio-ingressgateway` deployed to namespace `virtual-garden-istio-ingress`. 
 The `virtual-garden-kube-apiserver` `Service` in the `garden` namespace is only of type `ClusterIP`. 
 Consequently, DNS records for this API server must target the load balancer IP of the `istio-ingressgateway`. 

What you expected to happen:
The contradicting statements that are using different service types for the virtual-garden-kube-apiserver service to be fixed.

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible):

Anything else we need to know?:

Environment:

• Gardener version:
• Kubernetes version (use kubectl version):
• Cloud provider or hardware configuration:
• Others:

[Johannes Scheerer]

/assign