Bitcoin's BIP-110 Enters Mandatory Signaling With Just 2.53% Miner Support

Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 110 entered its mandatory signaling phase over the weekend, which is a major step in the proposal's activation process despite receiving support from only a small fraction of Bitcoin miners.

According to the BIP-110 monitoring dashboard, miners signaled support in just 51 of the previous 2,016 blocks, representing approximately 2.53% of the network's hash power, far below the 55% threshold required for early activation.

The milestone has renewed debate within the Bitcoin community over how consensus changes should be introduced and whether protocol upgrades can succeed without broad miner participation.

Nodes Begin Enforcing New Rules

Beginning at block 961,632, Bitcoin nodes running software that enforces BIP-110 started rejecting blocks that do not include version bit 4, the signaling mechanism designated for the proposal.

Meanwhile, standard Bitcoin nodes continue to accept both signaling and non-signaling blocks, allowing the network to operate under its existing consensus rules.

As expected, a minority chain consisting of BIP-110-enforcing nodes briefly emerged after the activation point but quickly fell behind Bitcoin's dominant chain because of the proposal's limited mining support.

With only a small percentage of miners signaling for the proposal, a sustained alternative chain appears unlikely unless participation increases significantly.

Proposal Aims to Restrict On-Chain Data

Developed by pseudonymous Bitcoin contributor Dathon Ohm, BIP-110 proposes a series of temporary consensus changes designed to reduce the amount of non-financial data stored on the Bitcoin blockchain.

If activated, according to Cointelegraph, the proposal would remain in effect for approximately one year and introduce limits on several transaction components, including reducing most new output scripts to 34 bytes, capping OP_RETURN outputs at 83 bytes, restricting certain witness elements and data pushes to 256 bytes, and temporarily limiting several Taproot capabilities.

Previously created unspent transaction outputs (UTXOs) would remain unaffected by the proposed rules.

Supporters argue the changes are intended to discourage inscriptions and other non-monetary uses of Bitcoin that increase storage requirements and bandwidth costs for node operators.

Critics Warn of Network Fragmentation

The proposal has generated significant debate within the Bitcoin ecosystem.

Critics, including Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and Blockstream CEO Adam Back, have warned that BIP-110 could create unnecessary divisions within the network by causing enforcing nodes to reject transactions that remain valid under Bitcoin's current consensus rules.

The disagreement reflects a broader debate over Bitcoin's primary purpose, with some developers advocating stricter limits on non-payment data while others argue that the protocol should remain neutral regarding how block space is used.

Activation Timeline Continues

Under the proposal's deployment schedule, the mandatory signaling window runs from block 961,632 through block 963,647.

If the process continues as specified, block 963,648 would mark the proposal's locked-in phase, while block 965,664 is designated as the point when the proposed transaction restrictions would begin taking effect.

However, with miner signaling remaining well below the required threshold, uncertainty persists over whether the proposal can gain sufficient support to move forward without causing a broader split within the network.

Hard Fork Discussion Emerges

Supporters of BIP-110 have also discussed contingency plans should miner backing remain insufficient.

Earlier this month, Bitcoin developer Chris Guida rebased preliminary code for a proof-of-work modification originally developed by Luke Dashjr, maintainer of Bitcoin Knots.

Guida described the code as a potential fallback option if miners continue opposing BIP-110, while emphasizing that no activation timeline has been established.

The development highlights the growing tension surrounding one of Bitcoin's most closely watched protocol proposals, as the community continues debating how future consensus changes should be implemented and who ultimately determines the network's direction.