Rethink building SNI for multizone MeshService

[jakubdyszkiewicz]

Description

The current way is a bit hacky
#10451 (comment)
While it works, we should consider something more robust.

Options that come to my mind:

1. More labels
2. Put SNI in MeshService and sync it cross zone. This is nice but how to handle splits?

xref #10435

[jakubdyszkiewicz]

xref #10918

[lahabana]

@jakubdyszkiewicz does this cover the implem of MADR-59?

[jakubdyszkiewicz]

yes, it's basically implem of https://github.com/kumahq/kuma/blob/master/docs/madr/decisions/059-sni-in-the-resource.md

[lahabana]

Put SNI in MeshService and sync it cross zone. This is nice but how to handle splits?

Do we agree that we decided to not do splits?

[lahabana]

Also we agree that the format is agreed on and this change would be just to remove the zone CP to "make up" the format for remote access to services?

In other words this is an improvement but there wouldn't be a breaking change in implementing this (just if the SNI is in the MeshService object use this instead)

[jakubdyszkiewicz]

Do we agree that we decided to not do splits?

Yes, we do not do splits anymore