Use ClusteringRule for SecureClusteredMessagingIT

[npepinpe]

Description

This PR rewrites the existing SecureClusteredMessagingIT to use the ClusteringRule instead of containers. This is in attempt to fix the the flakiness where, every once in a while, the gateway's messaging service is not accessible from the outside (and only in CI).

The assumption is that, since we've verified the nodes are still talking to each other fine, this is not a production issue but an environmental one, so rewriting the test to modify the environment is a valid solution (if incomplete, as root causing the problem would have been preferable of course). As we've already spent too much time on this, however, root causing was shelved in favor of this approach.

Related issues

closes #10655

Definition of Done

Not all items need to be done depending on the issue and the pull request.

Code changes:

• The changes are backwards compatibility with previous versions
• If it fixes a bug then PRs are created to backport the fix to the last two minor versions. You can trigger a backport by assigning labels (e.g. backport stable/1.3) to the PR, in case that fails you need to create backports manually.

Testing:

• There are unit/integration tests that verify all acceptance criterias of the issue
• New tests are written to ensure backwards compatibility with further versions
• The behavior is tested manually
• The change has been verified by a QA run
• The impact of the changes is verified by a benchmark

Documentation:

• The documentation is updated (e.g. BPMN reference, configuration, examples, get-started guides, etc.)
• New content is added to the release announcement
• If the PR changes how BPMN processes are validated (e.g. support new BPMN element) then the Camunda modeling team should be informed to adjust the BPMN linting.

Please refer to our review guidelines.

[github-actions]

Test Results

   948 files  ±  0     948 suites  ±0   1h 41m 45s ⏱️ - 5m 23s
7 542 tests  - 75  7 535 ✔️  - 75  7 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
7 734 runs   - 75  7 725 ✔️  - 75  9 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 05488ec. ± Comparison against base commit 0885562.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

[npepinpe]

I ran it several times (> 20), and it's generally green. There's another 10 runs coming just to verify, but I think it can be reviewed already.

[deepthidevaki]

Thanks 🚀 Hope this fixes the flaky test 🤞

[npepinpe]

bors merge

[zeebe-bors-camunda]

Build succeeded:

• Test summary

[backport-action]

Successfully created backport PR #10829 for stable/8.1.