Some documentation clarifications and format fixes

Signed-off-by: Anna Khmelnitsky <[email protected]>

website/docs/guides/faq.html.markdown

@@ -11,10 +11,7 @@ description: |-
 
 Consider the following error:
 
-```
-Error:  Failed to delete <object>: The object path=[..] cannot be deleted as either it
-has children or it is being referenced by other objects
-```
+```Error:  Failed to delete <object>: The object path=[..] cannot be deleted as either it has children or it is being referenced by other objects```
 
 Usually this error results from terraform engine assuming certain order of delete/update operation that is not consistent with NSX. In order to imply correct order on terraform and thus fix the issue, add the following clause to affected resources:
 
@@ -35,10 +32,7 @@ However, sometimes the error above is symptom of misconfiguration, i.e. there ar
 
 Consider same error as above:
 
-```
-Error:  Failed to delete <object>: The object path=[..] cannot be deleted as either it has
-children or it is being referenced by other objects..
-```
+```Error:  Failed to delete <object>: The object path=[..] cannot be deleted as either it haschildren or it is being referenced by other objects..```
 
 Sometimes this error is due to the fact that certain resource cleanup on NSX needs more time. For now, the workaround would be to re-run the destroy command after few seconds. In future versions of provider, this issue will be solved with automatic retry.
 
@@ -68,9 +62,7 @@ Be sure to also specify `enforcement_point` as `vmc-enforcementpoint` in provide
 
 Consider the following error:
 
-```
-Failed to read <object type> (Error unmarshalling server response)
-```
+```Failed to read <object type> (Error unmarshalling server response)```
 
 This issue is usually caused by proxy timeout on VMC side. Re-apply can help. If you run into this a lot, please consider direct connection to NSX in your VMC environment to avoid the proxy overhead. If this is not an option for you, another way to reduce the load on the proxy could be to avoid heavy usage of data sources, and instead use policy path directly in your configuration.
 
@@ -79,10 +71,7 @@ This issue is usually caused by proxy timeout on VMC side. Re-apply can help. If
 
 Consider the following error:
 
-```
-User is not authorized to perform this operation on the application.
-Please contact the system administrator to get access. (code 401)
-```
+```User is not authorized to perform this operation on the application. Please contact the system administrator to get access. (code 401)```
 
 Provided your VMC token is accurate and you have sufficient permissions, it is likely that `domain` is missing from resource configuration. Domains of VMC are different from default value that is set in the provider.For group resource, the fix would be specifying relevant domain like in the example below:
 

website/docs/r/policy_evpn_config.html.markdown

@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ The following arguments are supported:
   * `gateway_path` - (Required) Policy Path for Tier0 Gateway to configure EVPN on.
   * `mode` - (Required) EVPN Mode, one of `INLINE` or `ROUTE_SERVER`. In `ROUTE_SERVER` mode, edge nodes participate in the BGP EVPN control plane route exchanges only and do not participate in data forwarding.
   * `vni_pool_path` - (Optional) Path of VNI pool to use. This setting is only applicable (and required) with `INLINE` mode.
+  * `evpn_tenant_path` - (Optional) Policy path for EVPN tenant. Relevant for `ROUTE_SERVER` mode.
   * `tag` - (Optional) A list of scope + tag pairs to associate with this resource.
 
 ## Attributes Reference

website/docs/r/policy_gateway_policy.html.markdown

@@ -37,6 +37,9 @@ resource "nsxt_policy_gateway_policy" "test" {
     scope              = [nsxt_policy_tier1_gateway.policygateway.path]
   }
 
+  lifecycle {
+    create_before_destroy = true
+  }
 }
 ```
 
@@ -72,10 +75,15 @@ resource "nsxt_policy_gateway_policy" "test" {
     scope              = [nsxt_policy_tier1_gateway.policygateway.path]
   }
 
+  lifecycle {
+    create_before_destroy = true
+  }
 }
 ```
-## Argument Reference
 
+-> We recommend using `lifecycle` directive as in samples above, in order to avoid dependency issues when updating groups/services simultaneously with the rule.
+
+## Argument Reference
 
 The following arguments are supported:
 

website/docs/r/policy_ipsec_vpn_local_endpoint.html.markdown

@@ -20,7 +20,6 @@ resource "nsxt_policy_ipsec_vpn_local_endpoint" "test" {
   local_address    = "20.20.0.10"
   local_id         = "test"
   certificate_path = data.nsxt_policy_certificate.cert.path
-  trust_ca_paths   = [data.nsxt_policy_certificate.trust_ca.path]
 }
 ```
 

website/docs/r/policy_security_policy.html.markdown

@@ -42,10 +42,14 @@ resource "nsxt_policy_security_policy" "policy1" {
     disabled         = true
     notes            = "Disabled by starfish for debugging"
   }
+
+  lifecycle {
+    create_before_destroy = true
+  }
 }
 ```
 
-Note: This usage is for Global Manager only
+## Global Manager example
 
 ```hcl
 data "nsxt_policy_site" "paris" {
@@ -80,9 +84,15 @@ resource "nsxt_policy_security_policy" "policy1" {
     disabled         = true
     notes            = "Disabled by starfish for debugging"
   }
+
+  lifecycle {
+    create_before_destroy = true
+  }
 }
 ```
 
+-> We recommend using `lifecycle` directive as in samples above, in order to avoid dependency issues when updating groups/services simultaneously with the rule.
+
 ## Argument Reference
 
 The following arguments are supported: