This isn't ready to merge yet, as some of the logic for a correct implementation is missing upstream, but I would be grateful if someone with a router that supports PCP could test this and let me know if it is working as expected (ie. it creates a mapping).
There is also potential for a bigger rework of go-nat in general, as the architecture of PCP is quite different from previous NAT traversal implementations, as it takes into account multiple network interfaces, supports IPv4 and IPv6, and server sent events.
This isn't ready to merge yet, as some of the logic for a correct implementation is missing upstream, but I would be grateful if someone with a router that supports PCP could test this and let me know if it is working as expected (ie. it creates a mapping).
There is also potential for a bigger rework of go-nat in general, as the architecture of PCP is quite different from previous NAT traversal implementations, as it takes into account multiple network interfaces, supports IPv4 and IPv6, and server sent events.
Once merged, this should close #3