feat(evm): Raw Ethereum transaction relay support

[ilblackdragon]

Adds support for relaying signed transactions from Ethereum.
Can be used by MetaMask configured to the right RPC proxy or NEAR's Web3 provider in sendRawTransaction method.

Addresses few collateral issues:

• converting chain_id to u64, as prior it was u128 which didn't match OE EVM interface
• fixing view_call function when it's used for contract deployment (this is used for dry_run)

Test plan

Adding unit test for sending signed transactions: transfer, deploy code and function call. Testing invalid signature and chain_id passes inside the transaction.
Adding support for sendRawTransaction in near-web3-provider repo: aurora-is-near/near-web3-provider#70

[bowenwang1996]

what's the reason for changing the type of chain_id from u128 to u64?

[ilblackdragon]

@bowenwang1996 because chain_id is u64: https://github.com/near/nearcore/blob/master/runtime/near-evm-runner/src/near_ext.rs#L74
It was my original mistake to make it u128 everywhere in our code.

[artob]

@bowenwang1996 because chain_id is u64: https://github.com/near/nearcore/blob/master/runtime/near-evm-runner/src/near_ext.rs#L74
It was my original mistake to make it u128 everywhere in our code.

To be pedantic, "Chain ID is a 256-bit value" per EIP-1344. However, in terms of OpenEthereum's APIs, they do only take a 64-bit value. And all registered chain IDs do fit within 64 bits, and certainly our own chain IDs do, so probably no good reason to need it be larger.

[artob]

Looks really good overall, and significantly increases our out-of-the-box Eth1 compatibility.

My only comments are some nits that can be addressed in a later iteration.

[artob]

@ilblackdragon @ailisp FYI, I've rebased this pull request against the current master branch just now.

[evgenykuzyakov]

You need to bump EVM protocol version to hardfork betanet.

[artob]

@bowenwang1996 Need your review as code owner to be able to merge this.

[artob]

You need to bump EVM protocol version to hardfork betanet.

Done, just pushed now. @bowenwang1996 This is all good to go as far as @ilblackdragon and I are concerned, if you would have a chance to review.

[artob]

@olonho @willemneal Could we get a review from you guys as well, pretty please, to unblock merging this?

[willemneal]

LGTM just one logic question.