Ownership selection in VPC tiers and VPC public IPs

[gpordeus]

Description

This PR adds the "ownership selection" UI fields to VPC tiers and VPC public IPs.

The "vpcAccess" response attribute was added so the UI can know if the caller has access to the VPC without needing to make a whole new request. This is needed to avoid 404 links (since router.resolve is assembled through API permissions) and so the UI can present the correct public IPs to their possible network tiers (e.g. if the User has tiers of two different VPCs, they can't use one's public IP in the other).

Types of changes

• [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• [X] Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• [ ] Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• [ ] build/CI
• [ ] test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• [ ] Major
• [X] Minor

Bug Severity

• [ ] BLOCKER
• [ ] Critical
• [ ] Major
• [ ] Minor
• [ ] Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

New tier possible owners' listing


Tier listing


User accessing their tier of the Admin's VPC


Possible owners for new IP


How Has This Been Tested?

Environment with domains Root (with accounts Root Admin and User), Root/1 (with a Domain Admin), Root/A (with a Domain Admin) and Root/A/B (with a Domain Admin and a User). There is a Project in each domain, owned by the respective admins.

Situation	Test
As Root Admin with VPC owned by self.	Every account and project listed as possible owners in Tier creation
As Root Admin with VPC owned by self and one tier for each account and project.	Every account and project listed as possible owners in acquiring public IP.
Same as previous, but remove some of the tiers.	The deleted tiers' owners also disappeared from IP possible owners' list, except Root Admin itself.
As Root Admin with VPC owned by self, create one tier with a private ACL for the User.	User's access to network page did not present the 'ACL' attribute.
As Root Admin with VPC owned by self, create one tier with a global ACL for the User.	User's access to network page showed 'ACL' attribute.

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 11.42857% with 31 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 15.82%. Comparing base (5ff0b99) to head (147a534). Report is 69 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...src/main/java/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java	16.00%	21 Missing :warning:
...pache/cloudstack/api/response/NetworkResponse.java	0.00%	6 Missing :warning:
...che/cloudstack/api/response/IPAddressResponse.java	0.00%	3 Missing :warning:
...tack/api/command/user/network/ListNetworksCmd.java	0.00%	1 Missing :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #9692 +/- ## ============================================ + Coverage 15.57% 15.82% +0.24% - Complexity 12052 12564 +512 ============================================ Files 5505 5629 +124 Lines 482738 492078 +9340 Branches 58961 62315 +3354 ============================================ + Hits 75203 77879 +2676 - Misses 399226 405877 +6651 - Partials 8309 8322 +13 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/cloudstack/pull/9692/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [uitests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/cloudstack/pull/9692/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `4.47% <ø> (+0.30%)` | :arrow_up: | | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/cloudstack/pull/9692/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `16.62% <11.42%> (+0.26%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[sureshanaparti]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 11164