[x-pack/filebeat/netflow] add netflow status reporting under Agent management

[pkoutsovasilis]

Proposed commit message

This PR extends netflow input with status reporting capabilities when running under management of elastic-agent. Also, it adds an integration test for netflow

Checklist

• [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
• [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• [x] I have made corresponding change to the default configuration files
• [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• [x] I have added an entry in CHANGELOG.next.asciidoc or CHANGELOG-developer.next.asciidoc.

Disruptive User Impact

N/A

Author's Checklist

N/A

How to test this PR locally

mage goIntegTest

Related issues

• Related https://github.com/elastic/security-integrations/issues/289

Use cases

N/A

Screenshots

N/A

Logs

N/A

[mergify[bot]]

This pull request does not have a backport label. If this is a bug or security fix, could you label this PR @pkoutsovasilis? 🙏. For such, you'll need to label your PR with:

• The upcoming major version of the Elastic Stack
• The upcoming minor version of the Elastic Stack (if you're not pushing a breaking change)

To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed branches, such as:

• backport-v8./d.0 is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/sec-deployment-and-devices (Team:Security-Deployment and Devices)

[mergify[bot]]

This pull request is now in conflicts. Could you fix it? 🙏 To fixup this pull request, you can check out it locally. See documentation: https://help.github.com/articles/checking-out-pull-requests-locally/

git fetch upstream
git checkout -b pkoutsovasilis/netflow_status_report upstream/pkoutsovasilis/netflow_status_report
git merge upstream/main
git push upstream pkoutsovasilis/netflow_status_report

[pierrehilbert]

@pkoutsovasilis Don't we want to backport this on the 8.15 branch?

[pkoutsovasilis]

@pkoutsovasilis Don't we want to backport this on the 8.15 branch?

that's a good question ty for asking @pierrehilbert 🙂 AFAIK this is an "enhancement" so the policy is no backporting?! but maybe I am wrong!?

[pierrehilbert]

From what I can see we don't have our first BC for 8.15 so this is probably okay. I would say it depends how important this is.

[pkoutsovasilis]

From what I can see we don't have our first BC for 8.15 so this is probably okay. I would say it depends how important this is.

hmm I see your point! @andrewkroh you are a stakeholder for this issue, so should we "backport" it, given the current state that @pierrehilbert mentioned above?

[andrewkroh]

No need to backport to 8.15. I think as of now there is a BC, and this is more of a nice to have feature.