feat: add LRU cache for DID Documents

[paullatzelsperger]

What this PR changes/adds

• Modifies the existing LruCache to become a ConcurrentLruCache.
• uses the ConcurrentLruCache in the DidResolverRegistryImpl to avoid excessive network traffic.

Why it does that

Avoid excessive network traffic, when resolving the same did in close temporal vicinity.

Further notes

List other areas of code that have changed but are not necessarily linked to the main feature. This could be method
signature changes, package declarations, bugs that were encountered and were fixed inline, etc.

Linked Issue(s)

Closes #3645

Please be sure to take a look at the contributing guidelines and our etiquette for pull requests.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: 20 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (2b5f079) 71.79% compared to head (8a60363) 71.74%.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...clipse/edc/util/collection/ConcurrentLruCache.java	36.36%	14 Missing ⚠️
...dc/iam/did/resolution/DidResolverRegistryImpl.java	66.66%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3651      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   71.79%   71.74%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         915      915              
  Lines       18312    18342      +30     
  Branches     1038     1040       +2     
==========================================
+ Hits        13148    13159      +11     
- Misses       4710     4727      +17     
- Partials      454      456       +2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[bscholtes1A]

@paullatzelsperger sorry for the late review, but shouldn't we fetch again the DID document after some time? (even if it is present in the cache), in order to avoid to continue using an outdated version of the DID document?

[paullatzelsperger]

@paullatzelsperger sorry for the late review, but shouldn't we fetch again the DID document after some time? (even if it is present in the cache), in order to avoid to continue using an outdated version of the DID document?

Yep, good point. Sounds like a task for a follow-up issue :)
I didn't bother with it now, because for our intents and purposes, the dids are rather long-living.
The intention here was to avoid multiple network calls in close temporal proximity.