Add netlink implementation

[DL6ER]

What does this implement/fix?

The existing implementation for /api/network/{gateway,interface} relied on manually parsing various files in /proc/ and /sys/class/net. This had several drawbacks, e.g., was it not possible to get IPv6 routes (and, hence, gateways) or lifetimes and priority of IPv6 addresses.

This PR instead implements Netlink which is the proper way of querying the kernel in a standardized way about routes and interface details. It is also the same method used by the popular ip command (e.g. ip a and ip r):

Netlink is designed and used for transferring miscellaneous networking information between the kernel space and userspace processes. Networking utilities, such as the iproute2 family and the utilities used for configuring mac80211-based wireless drivers, use Netlink to communicate with the Linux kernel from userspace. Netlink provides a standard socket-based interface for userspace processes, and a kernel-side API for internal use by kernel modules. Originally, Netlink used the AF_NETLINK socket family.

Netlink is designed to be a more flexible successor to ioctl; RFC 3549 describes the protocol in detail.

This change allows us to provide much better/more complete interface information through the API offering the base for implementing this Discourse feature request.

Note: The prefered (one r) typo is a standard typo in Linux and expected.

---

Related issue or feature (if applicable): N/A

Pull request in docs with documentation (if applicable): N/A

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm the following:

1. I have read and understood the contributors guide, as well as this entire template. I understand which branch to base my commits and Pull Requests against.
2. I have commented my proposed changes within the code.
3. I am willing to help maintain this change if there are issues with it later.
4. It is compatible with the EUPL 1.2 license
5. I have squashed any insignificant commits. (git rebase)

Checklist:

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• I based my code and PRs against the repositories developmental branch.
• I signed off all commits. Pi-hole enforces the DCO for all contributions
• I signed all my commits. Pi-hole requires signatures to verify authorship
• I have read the above and my PR is ready for review.

[yubiuser]

Why did you modify the devcontainer plugins?

[DL6ER]

Because these two plugins are what I manually need to reinstall after rebuilding the container once a week when a new version is pushed to GHCR. It is a step that seems worth automating.

[pralor-bot]

This pull request has been mentioned on Pi-hole Userspace. There might be relevant details there:

https://discourse.pi-hole.net/t/i-updates-are-available/71248/3

[github-actions]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[github-actions]

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

[github-actions]

Conflicts have been resolved.

[DL6ER]

Holding merge until #2014 is merged as future development-v6 builds would fail due to the external DNSSEC issue.

Also, we are waiting until pi-hole/PADD#395 is ready as well.