Changes for local network policies

[mchalla]

• Implemented on top of Genie changes from Tom
• Add the following classes class[gbpe/LocalL24Classifier] class[gbp/LocalSecGroup] class[gbp/LocalSecGroupSubject] class[gbp/LocalSecGroupRule] class[gbp/LocalAllowDenyAction] class[gbp/LocalSubnets] class[gbp/LocalSubnet]
• These are enabled via opflex.enable-local-netpol config variable and read from .netpol files in the netpol-sources.filesystem thats configured in the opflex config (Default localnetpol is disabled)
• Each security group will contain a .netpol json file containing corresponding netpol
• The implemenation will read these files and update the MODB via the read that then triggers callbacks. These will be the old callbacks in the policymanager that have been extended to also process the Local network policies.
• Add new classtype LOCAL_POLICY to differentiate between POLICY that is always assumed as remote and would trigger a resolveObj
• extend deserialize to support local ObjectInstances, currently it assumes its only called for remote ones.
• add LocalAllowDenyAction on startup since this is the only MO shared across netpols and should never be deleted.
• Implement delete by saving the notifs during add. File based delete will not work without some state because the file notification happens after the file is deleted.

[mchalla]

India team still testing. DO NOT MERGE.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.402% (-0.4%) from 78.839%
when pulling b8f4b59 on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.455% (-0.4%) from 78.839%
when pulling 2cc97df on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.397% (-0.4%) from 78.839%
when pulling 2cc97df on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.464% (-0.4%) from 78.839%
when pulling 58240ef on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.389% (-0.5%) from 78.839%
when pulling 58240ef on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.356% (-0.5%) from 78.839%
when pulling c003fe7 on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.379% (-0.5%) from 78.839%
when pulling c003fe7 on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.368% (-0.5%) from 78.839%
when pulling 3999270 on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.354% (-0.5%) from 78.839%
when pulling 3999270 on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.308% (-0.5%) from 78.839%
when pulling f12e3fa on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.368% (-0.5%) from 78.839%
when pulling f12e3fa on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 5e6f2cb on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.37% (-0.4%) from 78.777%
when pulling b4568cb on opflex-hpp-optimization
into 43cc55a on master.

[coveralls]

coverage: 78.2% (-0.4%) from 78.633%
when pulling dab0a5c on opflex-hpp-optimization
into efa3d40 on master.

[tomflynn]

Just some nits

[tomflynn]

What do you think about checking isPolicy(aIn) and then just looking for Local at the start of the class name instead of listing them all individually. We could just say that's the convention going forward for any local policy

I can handle this in a followup PR if you think it makes sense

[mchalla]

yea thats a good idea. thanks.