Add support for S1G beacon parsing

[rkinder2023]

New feature for dot11.py, add support for S1G beacon parsing.

Includes changes to support extension frames (as much as needed for S1G beacon), as well as unit test to confirm the basics of an S1G beacon.

dot11 unit tests run, all pass.

fixes #4439

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 83.33333% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 48.95%. Comparing base (a1afb9a) to head (52f8eb1).

:exclamation: There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (a1afb9a) and HEAD (52f8eb1). Click for more details.

HEAD has 9 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (a1afb9a)	HEAD (52f8eb1)
	10	1

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #4442       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   81.46%   48.95%   -32.52%     
===========================================
  Files         353      346        -7     
  Lines       84477    78591     -5886     
===========================================
- Hits        68822    38473    -30349     
- Misses      15655    40118    +24463     

Files	Coverage Δ
scapy/layers/dot11.py	54.26% <83.33%> (-37.15%)	:arrow_down:

... and 262 files with indirect coverage changes

[rkinder2023]

Note that this is not complete yet, but good enough to get S1G beacons parsed. Still to do is modify the core Dot11 class to add support for S1G beacon frame control field.

[rkinder2023]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 48.99%. Comparing base (1e857c9) to head (efef84f).

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (1e857c9) and HEAD (efef84f). Click for more details. HEAD has 9 uploads less than BASE

Flag	BASE (1e857c9)	HEAD (efef84f)
	10	1

Additional details and impacted files

Anyone know what went wrong here? Why did coverage go down so much?