Hans Svensson

Well, bytearray is base64 (+ check bytes) - but sure `ba_...` (or `cb_...`) could be used in this case, I agree!

Isn't this just a two step process: grab the transaction + do a dry-run? But I guess you could make a special API for that - though I'm not sure...

_If_ the tx gets included right in between you'll still be happy I guess... You could build some logic around `tx_nonce_already_used_for_account` to be extra safe, but this would probably be...

Made this a draft awaiting final versions of some repo updates and full sync tests on testnet/mainnet

I have synced Mainnet (thrice) and Testnet with an OTP-27 build and all issues seems resolved.

Rebased - because of conflict...

Yes the old one was broken for both OTP-26 and OTP-27...

This is not trivial, the code you refer to is only a test dependency to the node (and for a good reason).

It is an interesting idea - but one I am not sure how to implement efficiently?! You'd still want nonces to be unique, right? (Or else it would be trivial...

A random nonce would make the TX considerably larger, not sure that is preferrable - and at the end of the day the node would have to check for TX-uniqueness...