Extend e2e chainsaw tests

[jstudler]

Adds new e2e tests for IpAddressClaim and IpRangeClaim and aligns naming of all test resources (folder names, chainsaw test names and prefixes for k8s CRs).

Changes:

• Remove netboxOperatorRestorationHash from assertions everywhere except in the restoration and parentPrefixSelector tests
• Naming: All tests now have a .metadata.name compatible name. This name is used in the path of the file in git, in the .metadata.name of the chainsaw Test yaml and as name (prefix) for all CRs involved (e.g. PrefixClaim, IpAddressClaim, IpRangeClaim)
• Steps are now smaller to be more self explanatory. Descriptions were removed where the step name was sufficient.
• Added an annotation called description to Chainsaw Test resources to allow for further explanation (What does the test do?)
• Updated the data loading script to include a description to prefixes (helps for better visibility in NetBox)
• Tweaked timeouts for chainsaw tests and resource limits for the NetBox deployment (was OOMKilled which had quite the impact on the Pipeline) to make pipeline more reliable
• Added apply & update test for IPv4+IPv6 and IpAddressClaim+IpRangeClaim that expects updates to description and comments to succeed
• Added Prefix exhaustion test for IPv4+IPv6 and IpAddressClaim+IpRangeClaim that expects for the Claim CR to fail if the ParentPrefix is exhausted
• Added Restore test for IPv4+IPv6 and IpAddressClaim+IpRangeClaim that expects the same IP Range or IP Address to be assigned when restoring the resource from NetBox.
• Added a set of tests that verify that invalid CRs will fail. This is currently limited mostly to IP Range and one test for Prefix. All invalid tests created for IP Range can be scaled to IP Address and Prefix in a later stage.

Closes #145

[faebr]

Very nice these tests, I like that it checks all fields and we also make sure not to accidentally change a status field. Only small comments, I did not repeat them for all tests but obviously they apply to all the tests of the same type. Will you add the update of custom fields still in this mr?

[jstudler]

Very nice these tests, I like that it checks all fields and we also make sure not to accidentally change a status field. Only small comments, I did not repeat them for all tests but obviously they apply to all the tests of the same type. Will you add the update of custom fields still in this mr?

Thanks for the thorough review. I'd keep the todos since they'd require some adjustments to the Controllers and/or some troubleshooting.

[faebr]

Looks good to me, just a small question, do you know why this error is here: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox-operator/actions/runs/13636803517/job/38117487010?pr=249#step:7:1007

[faebr]

Looks good to me, just a small question, do you know why this error is here: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox-operator/actions/runs/13636803517/job/38117487010?pr=249#step:7:1007

its during cleanup from the cleanup script so all good