fix: windows use of REUSEADDR

[Green-Sky]

When SO_REUSEADDR is set on windows, it allows another process to "steal" the address, while in use.

see https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/winsock/using-so-reuseaddr-and-so-exclusiveaddruse#using-so_exclusiveaddruse

---

This change is 

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 72.98%. Comparing base (fa723e3) to head (eb3c8e4).
Report is 6 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
toxcore/network.c	66.66%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2790      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   72.96%   72.98%   +0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         149      149              
  Lines       30566    30572       +6     
==========================================
+ Hits        22303    22313      +10     
+ Misses       8263     8259       -4     

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

[nurupo]

Does it make sense to set both SO_REUSEADDR and SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE socket options? From that documentation it sounds like one must use one or another.

[nurupo]

Conversely, a socket with the SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE set cannot necessarily be reused immediately after socket closure. For example, if a listening socket with SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE set accepts a connection and is then subsequently closed, another socket (also with SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE) cannot bind to the same port as the first socket until the original connection becomes inactive.

Tox clients failing to restart due to the toxcore being unable to bind to the same port until the original connection becomes inactive is the reason why SO_REUSEADDR was used in the first place. Setting SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE brings this issue back again.

However, we made toxcore attempt to bind to a range of ports since then, 33445-33545 inclusively by default, so perhaps the use of a range of ports mitigates this issue and it's alright to use SO_EXCLUSIVEADDRUSE now?