BIP-110 Nears Aug. 7 Window with 0.31% Miner Support

BIP-110, a proposal to impose a one-year ban on Ordinals-style data inscriptions at the consensus level, approaches a mandatory signaling window tied to block 961,632, currently projected for Aug. 7, 2026. As of late June 2026, roughly 5 exahashes per second — about 0.31% of the network near 940 EH/s — have signaled support.

The proposal, authored by Dathon Ohm and titled the Reduced Data Temporary Soft Fork, would add a time-limited consensus restriction on arbitrary data embedding in Bitcoin transactions. The rules are written as a soft fork and would leave standard payment transactions using P2PKH, P2WPKH, and Taproot key-path spends valid. The limits target common methods used for Ordinals inscriptions, large OP_RETURN payloads, BRC-20 tokens and certain Taproot constructions repurposed for data storage. If activated, the restrictions would apply for 52,416 blocks, about one year, and then expire automatically unless extended.

BIP-110 uses a modified BIP9-style deployment. It requires 55% miner signaling within a retarget period (1,109 of 2,016 blocks) rather than the usual 95% threshold. If the 55% threshold is not reached by miner signaling, a mandatory signaling window tied to block 961,632 will begin; enforcing nodes would reject any block in that window that does not signal the specified bit. Monitoring sites show miner signaling at about 5 EH/s and in recent days some trackers reported signaling dropping to 0.00%. Ocean Pool has produced most of the signaling blocks observed since March 2026.

Node-level readiness for BIP-110 varies by measure. Deployments capable of enforcing the proposal are mainly variants of Bitcoin Knots. One node summary lists Bitcoin Knots at about 22.65% of reporting nodes, while other trackers that measure listening nodes place BIP-110-capable deployments between roughly 2% and 8%.

The proposal raises the possibility that enforcing nodes and miners that signal could reject blocks that other miners and nodes accept, producing two competing chains. A chain enforced by the minority of nodes and miners would likely run with lower hashrate and face difficulty adjustments. The persistence or disappearance of such a chain would depend on whether exchanges, wallets and users treat its blocks as valid. During any contested period, infrastructure providers could face halted deposits, replay risks and operational disruptions.

Critics have published technical objections. Adam Back wrote that the proposal “really doesn’t work, breaks multiple things, doesn’t have tech nor ecosystem consensus. Each is fatal.” Security engineer Jameson Lopp argued the plan is “reckless” and “doomed to fail,” citing split risk, rare Taproot edge cases that could create unspendable outputs, and operational burdens on wallets and pre-signed transactions. Some community members have declined to take a firm position, saying they lack enough information to predict outcomes.

Supporters say miners are unlikely to sustain a split by forgoing block rewards and point to a 2017 user-activated signaling episode as precedent for user pressure affecting activation. Campaigners have contacted node operators; one outreach effort reported about 100 positive responses from a sample of roughly 500 daily users and extrapolated potential support among node runners of 20–25% if that response scales.

The mandatory signaling window is weeks away. If BIP-110 activates, its restrictions would end automatically after roughly one year unless a follow-up proposal extends them.