Initialize source port and destination port if possible

[hugoArregui]

No description provided.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.23529% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 80.79%. Comparing base (32ef4a1) to head (90d37b4).

Files	Patch %	Lines
association.go	88.23%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #312      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   80.77%   80.79%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          49       49              
  Lines        4135     4150      +15     
==========================================
+ Hits         3340     3353      +13     
- Misses        651      653       +2     
  Partials      144      144              

Flag	Coverage Δ
go	80.79% <88.23%> (+0.02%)	⬆️
wasm	67.03% <47.05%> (-0.10%)	⬇️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[stv0g]

I am wondering, does this break backward compatibility with existing applications which pass a net.Conn?

[hugoArregui]

@stv0g I don't think so because I think peers are either not validating the port, or are going to validate the port correctly now. But this is me just playing with the protocol a little bit so maybe there are some cases I'm missing.