[SPARK-3796] Create external service which can serve shuffle files

This patch introduces the tooling necessary to construct an external shuffle service which is independent of Spark executors, and then use this service inside Spark. An example (just for the sake of this PR) of the service creation can be found in Worker, and the service itself is used by plugging in the StandaloneShuffleClient as Spark's ShuffleClient (setup in BlockManager).

This PR continues the work from #2753, which extracted out the transport layer of Spark's block transfer into an independent package within Spark. A new package was created which contains the Spark business logic necessary to retrieve the actual shuffle data, which is completely independent of the transport layer introduced in the previous patch. Similar to the transport layer, this package must not depend on Spark as we anticipate plugging this service as a lightweight process within, say, the YARN ApplicationManager, and do not wish to include Spark's dependencies (including Scala itself).

There are several outstanding tasks which must be complete before this PR can be merged:
- [ ] Complete unit testing of network/shuffle package.
- [ ] Performance and correctness testing on a real cluster.
- [ ] Documentation of the feature in the Spark docs.
- [ ] Remove example service instantiation from Worker.scala.

There are even more shortcomings of this PR which should be addressed in followup patches:
- Don't use Java serializer for RPC layer! It is not cross-version compatible.
- Handle shuffle file cleanup for dead executors once the application terminates or the ContextCleaner triggers.
- Integrate unit testing with Spark's tests (currently only runnable via maven).
- Improve behavior if the shuffle service itself goes down (right now we don't blacklist it, and new executors cannot spawn on that machine).
- SSL and SASL integration
- Nice to have: Handle shuffle file consolidation (this would requires changes to Spark's implementation).
Oh cool. I think we should call it something else because a lot of people automatically associate "standalone" with the cluster manager. There was a PR a while back that rewords this in the docs to replace "standalone" with something like "self-contained" or "isolated"