feat(p2p): bootstrap node specific configurations

[hanabi1224]

Summary of changes

(Part of #4346 investigation)

This PR adds --bootstrap CLI option to forest daemon and configure the P2P parameters differently, to align with lotus.

Changes introduced in this pull request:

• adds --bootstrap CLI option to forest daemon
• update gossipsub configs to align with lotus
• implement bootstrap node specific P2P configs that align with lotus

Reference issue to close (if applicable)

Closes

Other information and links

Change checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my own code,
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation,
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works (if possible),
• I have made sure the CHANGELOG is up-to-date. All user-facing changes should be reflected in this document.

[LesnyRumcajs]

Is there a reason for running a stateless node outside of being a bootstrap node? If not, let's coalesce stateless and bootstrap notion into a single one, probably bootstrap for better discoverability. This will require some changes in docs, but should be easy to find.

[hanabi1224]

Is there a reason for running a stateless node outside of being a bootstrap node? If not, let's coalesce stateless and bootstrap notion into a single one, probably bootstrap for better discoverability. This will require some changes in docs, but should be easy to find.

@LesnyRumcajs As I understand, the bootstrap-specific gossipsub config mainly works for regular(stateful) nodes. For stateless nodes, I need to explore further on whether it works better with the bootstrap config or the non-bootstrap config as lotus does not offer the stateless mode atm.

[LesnyRumcajs]

@hanabi1224 Did you confirm the mainnet node (both bootstrap and not bootstrap) works well with those settings? I don't understand what each of those parameters does, so it'd be great to manually check we're still good on connectivity side.

What should we actually expect by applying these settings? Better connectivity? Better performance?

Should this be documented so that the infrastructure team can benefit from this flag?

[LesnyRumcajs]

@hanabi1224 what do we do with this draft?