Update linodego to v1

[okokes-akamai]

General:

• Have you removed all sensitive information, including but not limited to access keys and passwords?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open or closed Pull Requests for the same bug/feature/question?

Pull Request Guidelines:

1. Does your submission pass tests?
2. Have you added tests?
3. Are you addressing a single feature in this PR?
4. Are your commits atomic, addressing one change per commit?
5. Are you following the conventions of the language?
6. Have you saved your large formatting changes for a different PR, so we can focus on your work?
7. Have you explained your rationale for why this feature is needed?
8. Have you linked your PR to an open issue

[okokes-akamai]

Once #126 gets merged, rebase this and add the following to getNodeBalancerByIPv4 instead of the hardcoded filter (this constructor is new to v1).

f := &linodego.Filter{}
f.AddField(linodego.Eq, "ipv4", ipv4)
filter, err := f.MarshalJSON()
if err != nil {
	return nil, err
}

[git-it127]

@okokes-akamai it seems this PR is not currently working. Can we convert this to a draft PR until it is in a working state.

[okokes-akamai]

Bumped linodego in e2e deps as well, just haven't had a chance to test it as I have issues with my environment.

[luthermonson]

@okokes-akamai if this is still good to go then let's get it merged. could you also bump go to 1.20 while youre in the go.mod?

[luthermonson]

think you could go all the way to v1.25.0 now?

[okokes-akamai]

@okokes-akamai if this is still good to go then let's get it merged. could you also bump go to 1.20 while youre in the go.mod?

This is definitely not ready to be merged, because it has implications for our deployment model due to the linodego URL handling. So we cannot just merge it, because then we'd have to rework our internal systems accordingly (and would thus be blocked from developing CCM until that happens).

[rammanoj]

This is being taken care at #143. @okokes-akamai I believe this should be good to close.