Update dl-iks-classic.md

[mgomezmx1]

The iks documentation is missing information that is included in the roks documentation, if nginx reverse proxy does not use d-0x-ws as part of the VALUE_FROM_INGRESS_SUBDOMAIN then satellite add hosts script will fail.

What must be peer reviewed?

Every change in the docs must be peer reviewed, unless you are JUST fixing a typo. When you add or change a sentence, you must get a peer review.
If your change is part of a larger overhaul or a bigger change in the docs, you can merge the content to staging without a peer review and inform the peer reviewer once you are done with the change and ready to have it peer reviewed. 
Important: Peer reviews do not replace technical reviews. Make sure to have your content reviewed by dev as well to ensure technical accuracy. 

What is included in a peer review? 

Content: 

• Does the topic/ section make sense and is worded in a way that a user can understand it? 
• Does the topic/ section seem to be consistent in style, look and feel with other sections in this topic/ other topics? 
• Do the provided steps work? Are steps/ explanations missing? (If possible, steps should be tested for new topics, and when new steps are added to existing topics)
• Are steps/ actions "hidden" in steps?
• Is the happy path, the why or the most common use case documented? 
• Are there any typos? Is the topic grammatically correct? 
• Is the topic/ section scannable or can you replace things with other elements, such as tables, lists, codeblocks, etc. ? (-> look for long paragraphs of text, long sentences, sentences with a lot of commas)
• Does the topic/ section meet IBM style guidelines? (e.g. look for allowed terms, present tense, no use of "there are", "may", or missing nouns after "this", referring to a noun as "it", etc. )
• Do headings match what you find in the topic/ section?
• Is important content "hiding" in H3s or in long paragraphs of text?
• Is the topic/ section written with a conversational style?
• Are service name conrefs used?
• Are codeblocks, pre, and screen tags used correctly? (e.g. YAML files in codeblocks, commands in pre, outputs in screen)

In Addition, if peer review is done in staging: 

• Does the format look ok? (e.g. indention of steps, numbering in lists, codeblocks, tables, colors, spacing)
• Do conrefs appear correctly?
• Does the TOC look ok?
• Do links work and point to the right topic? 
• Do you see any misplaced staging/ prod tags or conrefs?
• Is there enough space between topics/ steps? 
• Do images display correctly?

**Images: **

• Was the IBM Plex font used? 
• Are the right service icons used? Can text be replaced with a service icon?
• Is the flow comprehensive? 
• Is the image self-explanatory? (as much as it can, given that we show complex technical content)

What is NOT included in a peer review and must be completed by the writer? 

• Does the formatting looks ok in the docs framework (if peer review was done in a PR) 
• Check for broken links (if peer review was done in a PR) 
• Acrolinx testing and resolving of issues
• Making sure that images are accessible
• Making sure that images are ok to be translated (see guidelines)