policyfile: add AttrConfig support to ACLDetails

[rajsinghtech]

Adds missing AttrConfig field to ACLDetails struct to expose attribute configuration functionality already present in the internal policy package.

tailscale/tailscale#16167

[review-ai-agent]

Pull Request Revisions

Revision	Description
r8	Updated ACLAttrConfig documentation comments Enhanced documentation for ACLAttrConfig struct, adding more descriptive comments about Type and BroadcastToPeers fields
r7	Updated ACL attribute configuration types Modified ACLAttrConfig struct with clearer type definitions, added comments, and expanded test/example configurations for custom device attributes
r6	Added ACL attribute configuration struct Introduced new ACLAttrConfig struct and added AttrConfig map to ACL struct for enhanced attribute configuration
r5	Removed ACLs external management fields Deleted ACLsExternallyManagedOn and ACLsExternalLink fields from TailnetSettings and UpdateTailnetSettingsRequest structs
r4	No changes since last revision
r3	Added external ACL management fields Introduced new ACL-related fields in TailnetSettings and UpdateTailnetSettingsRequest, including external management and link options
r2	Added ACL attribute configuration struct Introduced new ACLAttrConfig struct and added AttrConfig map to ACL struct for attribute configuration
r1	Added ACL attribute configuration struct Introduced new ACLAttrConfig struct with type, node set permission, and peer broadcast fields

---

☑️ AI review skipped for r8

Help

React with emojis to give feedback on AI-generated reviews:

• 👍 means the feedback was helpful and actionable
• 👎 means the feedback was incorrect or unhelpful

💬 Replying to feedback with a comment helps us improve the system. Your input also contributes to shaping future interactions with the AI reviewer.

We'd love to hear from you—reach out anytime at [email protected].

[bradfitz]

No merge commits in the history. Can you rebase to exactly one commit?

[rajsinghtech]

sorry, done @bradfitz !

[tomhjp]

There is some existing unit test coverage for parsing ACLs - please could we include the new fields in that coverage?

[rajsinghtech]

Great Idea @tomhjp! Appreciate the notes, how does this look now?

[tomhjp]

This looks great! Thanks for addressing all the comments. Just left a couple of minor suggestions, but they might need validation as I'm not too familiar with this feature.

[tomhjp]

Oh and make sure your commit references the issue it's addressing before you merge - I only see it in the PR description atm