Added ability to create service clients anonymously

[gapra-msft]

Resolves #6575

[alzimmermsft]

Just want to make sure I understand the reasoning behind this change, given that making a call to checkAccess in every API and passing along anonymousAccess feel like an anti-pattern.

Scenario

I have multiple contains which allow public access and I want to generate clients to interact with them.

Option 1

I create a BlobServiceClient which doesn't have authentication information and begin creating BlobContainerClients with getBlobContainerClient.

Option 2

I configure a BlobContainerClientBuilder which doesn't have authentication information and begin creating BlobContainerClients by setting container name and calling buildClient.

This PR is to add support for option 1, correct? Would it be better to push on using option 2 as that falls in-line with the reason why the builder pattern was chosen?

[gapra-msft]

Just want to make sure I understand the reasoning behind this change, given that making a call to checkAccess in every API and passing along anonymousAccess feel like an anti-pattern.

Scenario

I have multiple contains which allow public access and I want to generate clients to interact with them.

Option 1

I create a BlobServiceClient which doesn't have authentication information and begin creating BlobContainerClients with getBlobContainerClient.

Option 2

I configure a BlobContainerClientBuilder which doesn't have authentication information and begin creating BlobContainerClients by setting container name and calling buildClient.

This PR is to add support for option 1, correct? Would it be better to push on using option 2 as that falls in-line with the reason why the builder pattern was chosen?

Option 2 was suggested to the customer but it looks like option 1 is more along the lines of what they wanted as a solution.

[mitchdenny]

/check-enforcer evaluate

[mitchdenny]

/check-enforcer reset

[mitchdenny]

/check-enforcer evaluate