Local IP Range support in compute_firewall

[rosmo]

Remove conflicts between source/destination IP ranges from google_compute_firewall to support Local IP Range Support Preview.

Documentation of the feature: https://cloud.google.com/vpc/docs/firewall-policies-rule-details#targets_and_ips_ingress

If this PR is for Terraform, I acknowledge that I have:

• Searched through the issue tracker for an open issue that this either resolves or contributes to, commented on it to claim it, and written "fixes {url}" or "part of {url}" in this PR description. If there were no relevant open issues, I opened one and commented that I would like to work on it (not necessary for very small changes).
• Generated Terraform, and ran make test and make lint to ensure it passes unit and linter tests.
• Ensured that all new fields I added that can be set by a user appear in at least one example (for generated resources) or third_party test (for handwritten resources or update tests).
• Ran relevant acceptance tests (If the acceptance tests do not yet pass or you are unable to run them, please let your reviewer know).
• Read the Release Notes Guide before writing my release note below.

Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)

compute: Add support for Local IP Ranges in `google_compute_firewall`

[modular-magician]

Hello! I am a robot who works on Magic Modules PRs.

I've detected that you're a community contributor. @ScottSuarez, a repository maintainer, has been assigned to assist you and help review your changes.

❓ First time contributing? Click here for more details

---

Your assigned reviewer will help review your code by:

• Ensuring it's backwards compatible, covers common error cases, etc.
• Summarizing the change into a user-facing changelog note.
• Passes tests, either our "VCR" suite, a set of presubmit tests, or with manual test runs.

You can help make sure that review is quick by running local tests and ensuring they're passing in between each push you make to your PR's branch. Also, try to leave a comment with each push you make, as pushes generally don't generate emails.

If your reviewer doesn't get back to you within a week after your most recent change, please feel free to leave a comment on the issue asking them to take a look! In the absence of a dedicated review dashboard most maintainers manage their pending reviews through email, and those will sometimes get lost in their inbox.

---

[modular-magician]

Hi there, I'm the Modular magician. I've detected the following information about your changes:

Diff report

Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Terraform GA: Diff ( 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-))
TF Validator: Diff ( 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-))

[modular-magician]

Tests analytics

Total tests: 2334
Passed tests 2089
Skipped tests: 244
Failed tests: 1

Action taken

Triggering VCR tests in RECORDING mode for the tests that failed during VCR. Click here to see the failed tests

TestAccLoggingBucketConfigProject_cmekSettings

[modular-magician]

Tests passed during RECORDING mode:
TestAccLoggingBucketConfigProject_cmekSettings[Debug log]

All tests passed
View the build log or the debug log for each test

[rileykarson]

@ScottSuarez: I'm adding @zli82016 as a first-pass reviewer, can you review once they've completed their review? Thanks!

[zli82016]

Hello, @rosmo, is there a Github issue you can link to this PR? Thanks.

[zli82016]

As the feature Local IP range support is still in public preview stage, should we wait and support it in Terraform by the time of GA release? I think it is hard to only support it in Beta with conflict attribute. @ScottSuarez, may I get your opinion? Thanks.

[rosmo]

@zli82016 There isn't an issue on Github for this, probably because it's so new. I can create one if that's helpful.

I think given the scope of the API changes (which work fine against both the GA and the beta endpoint) that are "relaxing of the rules" type, I don't see much point in trying to limit this to the beta provider only. What I'll do though is add some tests for the new "source + dest" way, so we can see that it doesn't break against the GA provider.

[modular-magician]

Hi there, I'm the Modular magician. I've detected the following information about your changes:

Diff report

Your PR generated some diffs in downstreams - here they are.

Terraform GA: Diff ( 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-))
Terraform Beta: Diff ( 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-))
TF Validator: Diff ( 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-))

[modular-magician]

Tests analytics

Total tests: 2341
Passed tests 2094
Skipped tests: 244
Failed tests: 3

Action taken

Triggering VCR tests in RECORDING mode for the tests that failed during VCR. Click here to see the failed tests

TestAccFirebaserulesRelease_BasicRelease|TestAccComputeFirewall_localRanges|TestAccLoggingBucketConfigProject_cmekSettings

[modular-magician]

Tests passed during RECORDING mode:
TestAccFirebaserulesRelease_BasicRelease[Debug log]
TestAccComputeFirewall_localRanges[Debug log]
TestAccLoggingBucketConfigProject_cmekSettings[Debug log]

All tests passed
View the build log or the debug log for each test

[zli82016]

LGTM. Please do not merge this PR until @ScottSuarez does the review.

[ScottSuarez]

Looks good ^-^.. Just ran the test in the GA provider and it passed