feat(transparent-proxy): deprecate argument 'redirect-inbound-port-v6' and introduce 'ip-family-mode'

[jijiechen]

fixes #4562

Checklist prior to review

• Link to relevant issue as well as docs and UI issues
  Deprecate support for redirect-inbound-port-v6  #4562
• This will not break child repos: it doesn't hardcode values (.e.g "kumahq" as a image registry) and it will work on Windows, system specific functions like syscall.Mkfifo have equivalent implementation on the other OS
  • Confirmed
• Tests (Unit test, E2E tests, manual test on universal and k8s)
  • Unit tests
  • Don't forget ci/ labels to run additional/fewer tests
• Do you need to update UPGRADE.md?
  • Updated
• Does it need to be backported according to the backporting policy? (this GH action will add "backport" label based on these file globs, if you want to prevent it from adding the "backport" label use no-backport-autolabel label)
  • No need

[bartsmykla]

Few suggestions around UPGRADE.md.

[slonka]

Just one nitpick.

[jakubdyszkiewicz]

All of this works of course, but if we can expose ipv4 and v6 on the same port wouldn't it be simpler to just change the default here?

        # Redirect port for inbound traffic.
        redirectPortInbound: 15006 # ENV: KUMA_RUNTIME_KUBERNETES_INJECTOR_SIDECAR_CONTAINER_REDIRECT_PORT_INBOUND
        # Redirect port for inbound traffic.
        redirectPortInboundV6: 15010 # ENV: KUMA_RUNTIME_KUBERNETES_INJECTOR_SIDECAR_CONTAINER_REDIRECT_PORT_INBOUND_V6

so v6 and v4 is on the same port?

[jijiechen]

wouldn't it be simpler to just change the default here?

Technically yes, but it needs people to configure it and they don't know what will be the side effects of doing so. So I guess poeple would normally not do this.
And we'll help them get rid of this unnecessary configuration item.
@jakubdyszkiewicz