Port (metal) lateinitializer of conflicting vlanIds and vxlandIds fields prevents deletion

[displague]

What happened?

Metal Port's lateinitializer is creating a conflicting definition with both vlanIds and vxlandIds. This is preventing deletion of the resource (possibly Ready status too).

How can we reproduce it?

https://community.equinix.com/t5/discussions/crossplane-failure-to-delete-port-resource-in-claim/m-p/2706/highlight/true#M1346

Similar reported in #50

The IP reservation is being successfully created. The problem seems to be at refresh, related to the quantity being set to 256 as a computed field despite the field conflicting with the other fields (cidr, vrf_id).

What environment did it happen in?

Crossplane version:
Provider version: 0.6.1

[displague]

#52 attempted to generalize the conditions in-which LateInititialization can be skipped. This change may not be complete, I suspect the names of the fields that were sent to the Canonical Ignore list need to be formatted differently. My evidence that this wasn't implemented correctly is the CRD changes between v0.7.0 and v0.8.0 (also those seen in #52). Looking at the Device resource, we see that the Facility vs Metro handling was removed without a suitable replacement.

With #49, there may be an alternate path:

	// THIS IS A BETA FIELD. It will be honored
	// unless the Management Policies feature flag is disabled.
	// InitProvider holds the same fields as ForProvider, with the exception
	// of Identifier and other resource reference fields. The fields that are
	// in InitProvider are merged into ForProvider when the resource is created.
	// The same fields are also added to the terraform ignore_changes hook, to
	// avoid updating them after creation. This is useful for fields that are
	// required on creation, but we do not desire to update them after creation,
	// for example because of an external controller is managing them, like an
	// autoscaler.
	InitProvider BGPSessionInitParameters `json:"initProvider,omitempty"`

[displague]

LateInitialization in mutually exclusive fields is discussed here: https://github.com/crossplane/upjet/blob/main/docs/configuring-a-resource.md#further-details-on-late-initialization

[displague]

I don't believe InitProvider will settle the vlan_ids vs vxlan_ids conflict since the fields are mutually exclusive and both would need to be defined (not possible) and ignored for InitProvider's ignore_changes to apply correctly.

https://github.com/equinix/terraform-provider-equinix/blob/main/internal/resources/metal/port/resource.go#L71-L86

It will need to be tested directly to see if this was covered in 80a4d74.

(testing is blocked by #56)