Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) has entered its mandatory signaling phase, but miner support remains limited. Data from BIP-110 Monitor cited by Cointelegraph shows that only 51 ou
Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) has entered its mandatory signaling phase, but miner support remains limited. Data from BIP-110 Monitor cited by Cointelegraph shows that only 51 out of 2,016 blocks, or roughly 2.53%, have signaled support.
BIP-110 has drawn attention because it proposes temporary restrictions on inscriptions and non-monetary data stored on the Bitcoin blockchain. At the same time, its rollout has created a divergence between nodes enforcing BIP-110 and those following Bitcoin’s existing consensus rules.
BIP-110 is a proposed Bitcoin consensus change authored by pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm. The proposal would temporarily limit the type and size of certain data that can be included on the blockchain, including inscriptions and some Taproot-related uses.
Supporters argue that the restrictions could reduce block space consumption from non-monetary data, which they say can increase storage and bandwidth requirements for node operators. The proposed rules are designed to remain in place for roughly one year and would not affect Bitcoin’s 21 million BTC supply cap or issuance schedule.
The main dispute centers on what happens when different groups of nodes enforce different rules. Since mandatory signaling began at block 961,632, nodes running BIP-110 have rejected blocks without version bit 4, while nodes that do not enforce the proposal can still accept those blocks.
That difference in validation rules has already produced a minority BIP-110 chain, although it quickly fell behind the dominant Bitcoin chain due to limited hash power.
This is at the heart of the debate. Supporters want to limit the use of Bitcoin’s block space, while critics argue that introducing different consensus rules could create a risk of chain fragmentation. Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and Blockstream CEO Adam Back are among those who have previously criticized the proposal.
The mandatory signaling phase runs from block 961,632 through 963,647. BIP-110 is then scheduled to enter the locked-in phase at block 963,648, with transaction restrictions set to take effect at block 965,664.
That means the full set of BIP-110 rules is not yet in effect. Miner support remains a key factor, as participation will influence how the proposal progresses and how much mining power backs the chain enforcing it.
The debate has also brought a potential Proof-of-Work change into consideration as a contingency. Bitcoin developer Chris Guida rebased early PoW-change code on Aug. 1, but no activation date had been set as of Aug. 10. For now, the proposal remains a contingency option rather than a decision to replace Bitcoin’s existing PoW mechanism.
BIP-110 does not change Bitcoin’s maximum supply, user balances or issuance mechanism. Its potential impact is primarily tied to transaction rules, block space and the possibility of different nodes enforcing different consensus rules.
Investors should therefore watch miner support and broader network participation. A widening split in consensus rules could create additional uncertainty for the network. So far, however, the BIP-110 minority chain remains far behind the dominant chain and has not emerged as a competing Bitcoin network of equal strength.
BIP-110 seeks to restrict the use of Bitcoin’s block space for inscriptions and non-monetary data. The proposal has nevertheless sparked controversy because its implementation can lead some nodes to enforce rules that differ from those followed by the broader Bitcoin network.
With miner support still limited and the minority chain trailing the dominant network, BIP-110 remains an evolving proposal rather than a settled change. For investors, the key issue is not Bitcoin’s supply or ownership structure, but how the proposal could affect consensus and the network’s stability going forward.
Instagram : @asetqu_official
Tiktok : @asetqu_official
Twitter : @AsetQu_Official
