awsvip versus AWS Policy

Recommend changes to allow AWS Policy to manage awsvip and fence_aws resources within EC2.

# example: pcs resource create vipaws awsvip aws_ip_region=us-east-1 profile=AWSPOLICY secondary_private_ip=10.0.1.100 --group aws
The policy below when attached to role/profile attached to EC2 allows fence_aws and awsvip resource to be managed via policy, no cli confguration need.
The policy below can be more restrictive to specific EC2s.
AWS Policy Json
{
"Version": "2012-10-17",
"Statement": [
{
"Sid": "VisualEditor0",
"Effect": "Allow",
"Action": [
"ec2:RebootInstances",
"ec2:DescribeInstances",
"ec2:StartInstances",
"ec2:DescribeTags",
"ec2:DescribeInstanceAttribute",
"ec2:UnassignPrivateIpAddresses",
"ec2:ModifyInstanceAttribute",
"ec2:AssignPrivateIpAddresses",
"ec2:StopInstances"
],
"Resource": "*"
}
]
}
[awsvip.pcs.sh.txt](https://github.com/ClusterLabs/resource-agents/files/10842957/awsvip.pcs.sh.txt)

Start with the attached awsvip.pcs.sh.txt and locate the repository entry points for awsvip and fence_aws. Compare how each currently receives AWS credentials with the example policy and profile usage in the issue. Done means both resources can be managed through the EC2 role or profile without CLI credential configuration, with validation covering the requested AWS actions.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.