Feature: OCPP 1.6j security extension

[xBlaz3kx]

Proposed changes

• Implemented OCPP 1.6 security extension messages
• Added implementation examples
• Added tests for extension implementation

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce?
Put an x in the boxes that apply

• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• Documentation Update (if none of the other choices apply)

Checklist

Put an x in the boxes that apply. You can also fill these out after creating the PR. If you're unsure about any of
them, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help! This is simply a reminder of what we are going to look for before
merging your code.

• I have signed the CLA
• Lint and unit tests pass locally with my changes
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• I have added necessary documentation (if appropriate)
• Any dependent changes have been merged and published in downstream modules

Further comments

• Code isn't unit tested

[xBlaz3kx]

@lorenzodonini requesting review, as per issue #262.

[xBlaz3kx]

Hey @lorenzodonini, I'm working on tests for the extension. Will you be able to review it and let me know your thoughts regarding this PR?

[AhmedAbouelkher]

@lorenzodonini to be honest, I need this feature ASAP.
Is there a way that I can help to accelerate merging the security extension feature?

[lorenzodonini]

Sorry for taking so long to review this. Amazing work!

I went through the official whitepaper and verified all the types/fields. I left a few comments regarding some extra/missing fields (I presume the messages were copied from v2, but there are actually some differences). Please double-check.

Otherwise this is G2G, we can write more tests later on.

[AhmedAbouelkher]

Hi @xBlaz3kx,
I've been working on fixes required by @lorenzodonini to speed things up.
Changes can be found in this PR: xBlaz3kx#1

[xBlaz3kx]

Hey @lorenzodonini @AhmedAbouelkher,

thank you for reviewing and catching all these details!
I guess I need to read the specification a bit better next time :)

I've merged @AhmedAbouelkher's PR to this branch and I think all of these issues were addressed.

I'll contribute the tests shortly, hopefully in a week or two.

[lorenzodonini]

Should I wait for the tests or merge this one right away? Test coverage drop is obviously expected, so don't mind the CI error

[xBlaz3kx]

I think you should merge, since @AhmedAbouelkher needs it asap. I'll contribute/fix the tests in a separate PR.

[xBlaz3kx]

@lorenzodonini Since this is a major update to the library, I think it would be best to create a new release 🎊

[lorenzodonini]

@lorenzodonini Since this is a major update to the library, I think it would be best to create a new release 🎊

There's a train of other small discussions/PRs I want to include. Will try to create a release in the next couple of days