bump o-f libs

[perdasilva]

Description of the change:

Motivation for the change:

Architectural changes:

Testing remarks:

Reviewer Checklist

• Implementation matches the proposed design, or proposal is updated to match implementation
• Sufficient unit test coverage
• Sufficient end-to-end test coverage
• Bug fixes are accompanied by regression test(s)
• e2e tests and flake fixes are accompanied evidence of flake testing, e.g. executing the test 100(0) times
• tech debt/todo is accompanied by issue link(s) in comments in the surrounding code
• Tests are comprehensible, e.g. Ginkgo DSL is being used appropriately
• Docs updated or added to /doc
• Commit messages sensible and descriptive
• Tests marked as [FLAKE] are truly flaky and have an issue
• Code is properly formatted

[camilamacedo86]

@perdasilva should we not spplit it in 3 prs to make it easier to cherry-pick in downstream?

[perdasilva]

@perdasilva should we not spplit it in 3 prs to make it easier to cherry-pick in downstream?

@camilamacedo86 I think to downstream, we'll just specifically pick the x/net update commits. I don't think we want to bring down the go bump, k8s lib bump, etc.

[camilamacedo86]

/lgtm