Add a new interface transport.Net

[stv0g]

Description

With two initial implementations

• stdnet.Net the functions from the standard libraries net package
• vnet.Net the virtual network for testing

This PR closes #34 and clearly separates the virtual network 'vnet.Net' from the code
which is using in production. Furthermore this change allows users to provide their own
transport.Net implementation for reasons like the one described in #34.

This PR changes some of the core API for this package, why we might consider bumping it to v2.
I have also prepared associated PRs for pion/ice as well as pion/turn which will be linked here shortly.

Reference issue

Closes #34
Closes #207
Closes #168

[stv0g]

@Sean-Der Can you unblock to CI for me? I think you already approved the idea of the PR in #168.

[stv0g]

@Sean-Der I fixed the CI warnings. Can you re-trigger the pipeline please?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Base: 84.63% // Head: 81.70% // Decreases project coverage by -2.92% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (86b987f) compared to base (a284a0e).
Patch coverage: 61.83% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

❗ Current head 86b987f differs from pull request most recent head 0b684cf. Consider uploading reports for the commit 0b684cf to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #204      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   84.63%   81.70%   -2.93%     
==========================================
  Files          31       32       +1     
  Lines        2695     2750      +55     
==========================================
- Hits         2281     2247      -34     
- Misses        311      394      +83     
- Partials      103      109       +6     

Flag	Coverage Δ
go	81.51% <61.83%> (-2.86%)	⬇️
wasm	77.20% <59.31%> (-0.28%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
replaydetector/replaydetector.go	90.32% <ø> (ø)
vnet/resolver.go	82.00% <0.00%> (ø)
vnet/tbf.go	92.85% <ø> (ø)
vnet/udpproxy.go	78.57% <20.00%> (-2.17%)	⬇️
vnet/conn.go	62.79% <47.36%> (-10.19%)	⬇️
test/util.go	79.31% <50.00%> (ø)
vnet/net.go	64.45% <57.28%> (-11.32%)	⬇️
stdnet/net.go	61.19% <61.19%> (ø)
vnet/router.go	81.40% <92.30%> (+0.05%)	⬆️
net.go	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
... and 5 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[stv0g]

Okay, yet another try please.
Only a single job (the commit message linter) failed.

I think this is ready to be merged @Sean-Der?

[stv0g]

Hi @enobufs, @Sean-Der,

is there anything I can do to help getting this PR getting merged?

Do we need more maintainers for Pion?

[enobufs]

Changes look good to me. (just one question)
Before merging this, I'd like to discuss with you how we want to roll out this change. I personally feel we should bump a major version. We'd also need to think about how to update pion/ice and pion/webrtc. Any thoughts?

[enobufs]

@Sean-Der @at-wat Is there anything I should be aware when we bump a major version of this package?

[stv0g]

@enobufs I already drafted a bunch of dependent PRs for other Pion packages which will use the new Net interface.

I will update those PRs once the v2 is released.

[at-wat]

@enobufs If there are other pending breaking changes, it would be nice to include them in v2.0.0.
We can tag v2.0.0-rc.0 after this PR if there might be other changes, and tag v2.0.0 after settled.

[at-wat]

It might be better to avoid using package name of stdlib.

[enobufs]

I think @at-wat has a good point.
I have thought about this for a while... I'd like to avoid vnet for the interface package. How about transport? I know it's 9 letters instead of 3, but it's "mostly" about transport layer and sounds right to me. It is also sort of promoting @stv0g 's "Net" interface to be the part of the primary package of this repo.

[stv0g]

@enobufs I agree :) I will implement this change

[stv0g]

Hi @enobufs,

I did some more work and moved the Net interface to the main package of the transport module.
I also started to extend the interface with support for TCP connections.
My goal is to extend the interface as much as we need to cover all uses of the standard Go net package throughout the various Pion packages where it makes sense:

• Dial, DialUDP, DialTCP
• Listen, ListenPacket, ListenTCP, ListenUDP
• ResolveIPAddr, ResolveTCPAddr, ResolveUDPAddr
• Interfaces, InterfaceByName, InterfaceByIndex
• more?

[stv0g]

More changes:

• Harmonized return types of {stdnet,vnet}.NewNet()
• Fix typos
• Fix UT assertions
• Add Net.InterfaceBy{Name,Index}()
• Make CI pass

[enobufs]

I did not realize earlier that this package had not even reached v1 yet. I am thinking about this work to be the release candidate as v1. (if necessary, we could create v0 (maintenance branch) if necessary (probably not). @at-wat @Sean-Der let me know if you have any thoughts/concerns.

Once this landed on master, I will tag it as v1.0.0-beta to facilitate further work on pion/ice.

[enobufs]

Great work! Are you able to rebase to fix the conflict? Other than that it looks good.

[at-wat]

Once this landed on master, I will tag it as v1.0.0-beta to facilitate further work on pion/ice.

v0 may have breaking change without bumping major version according to the semantic versioning.
(I don't have strong opinion about this)

[enobufs]

v0 may have breaking change without bumping major version according to the semantic versioning.

True. We could just bump it to v0.14.0 for now, but this package should have v1 soon.

[stv0g]

Thanks @enobufs and @at-wat :)

I've rebased and merged the changes. I expect that we might need some more minor patches to make it work with all the other Pion modules. After that we could think about tagging v1 in my opinion.