Use SsdpServiceInfo for ssdp tests (part 2)

[epenet]

Proposed change

Use SsdpServiceInfo for SOURCE_SSDP tests (part 2) as preliminary work for #59931.

They are split out from part 1 because the ssdp_location needs to be made optional (or we update the tests with a default value ssdp_location="mock_location")

Type of change

• Dependency upgrade
• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New integration (thank you!)
• New feature (which adds functionality to an existing integration)
• Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
• Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
• This PR is related to issue:
• Link to documentation pull request:

Checklist

• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
• There is no commented out code in this PR.
• I have followed the development checklist
• The code has been formatted using Black (black --fast homeassistant tests)
• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

• Documentation added/updated for www.home-assistant.io

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:

• The manifest file has all fields filled out correctly.
  Updated and included derived files by running: python3 -m script.hassfest.
• New or updated dependencies have been added to requirements_all.txt.
  Updated by running python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.
• For the updated dependencies - a link to the changelog, or at minimum a diff between library versions is added to the PR description.
• Untested files have been added to .coveragerc.

The integration reached or maintains the following Integration Quality Scale:

• No score or internal
• 🥈 Silver
• 🥇 Gold
• 🏆 Platinum

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

• I have reviewed two other open pull requests in this repository.

[probot-home-assistant]

Hey there @rfleming71, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (octoprint) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!
_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

[probot-home-assistant]

Hey there @rytilahti, @zewelor, @shenxn, @starkillerOG, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (yeelight) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!
_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

[probot-home-assistant]

Hey there @milanmeu, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (nanoleaf) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!
_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

[probot-home-assistant]

Hey there @Kane610, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (axis) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!
_{^{(message by CodeOwnersMention)}}

[epenet]

cc @bdraco

I have set ssdp_location back to optional following this comment from @chishm : #59931 (comment)

This being optional is good. The location won't always be available in ssdp:byebye messages, which are potentially handled by functions of type SsdpCallback registered via ssdp.async_register_callback.