Bitcoin nodes enforcing BIP-110 will soon begin rejecting non-signaling blocks, raising the risk of chain splits and operational uncertainty for miners, exchanges, and node operators as the signaling window closes with low support
Bitcoin is approaching a critical juncture as the BIP-110 proposal enters its enforcement phase, with only 185 blocks remaining before nodes running the upgrade begin rejecting blocks that do not signal support. BIP-110, a temporary soft fork aimed at reducing block data size, has seen minimal miner signaling so far, setting the stage for potential network divergence and operational challenges for participants across the ecosystem.
Low Signaling and Thresholds
As of August 7, only 48 out of 1,831 blocks in the current signaling period had indicated support for BIP-110, according to third-party monitoring tools. This represents just 2.62% of blocks, far below the 55% threshold-1,109 signaling blocks out of 2,016-required for the proposal to lock in. Even if every remaining block in the period signaled, the total would reach only about 11.56%. The lack of miner participation means that, while enforcing nodes will begin rejecting non-signaling blocks at height 961,632, the broader Bitcoin network will not automatically adopt the new rules.
Rule Divergence and Node Behavior
From block height 961,632, nodes enforcing BIP-110 will reject blocks that do not set version bit 4, while nodes running the current Bitcoin Core software or other non-enforcing clients may continue to accept those blocks if they otherwise meet consensus rules. This divergence could result in competing chains, with the persistence of any BIP-110-enforcing branch depending on whether miners produce enough valid blocks under the new rules. The proposal's timeline includes mandatory signaling through block 963,647, with lock-in ending at 963,648 and activation of reduced-data rules at 965,664, but these milestones apply only to enforcing nodes and do not bind the entire network.
Risks for Miners and Infrastructure
The technical split raises practical risks for miners, exchanges, wallets, and node operators. Mining pools such as OCEAN have announced separate endpoints for signaling and non-signaling blocks, but verifying whether all miners connected to a pool are enforcing BIP-110 requires independent validation. Alternative node implementations like Bitcoin Knots have warned that running outdated or non-enforcing software-including current Bitcoin Core-could leave chainstate validation incomplete or unsafe in certain scenarios. A recent technical write-up demonstrated that switching from a non-enforcing to an enforcing node could result in inherited blocks that violate new rules, requiring additional safeguards and potentially a full reindex to ensure consistency.
Market and Network Impact
With the signaling window closing and enforcement about to begin, the first blocks after height 961,631 will reveal whether any miners shift to supporting BIP-110 and whether an enforcing chain can accumulate enough work to persist. Measuring economic support for either side of a potential split would require evidence such as exchange listings, node adoption, or user behavior. The situation echoes previous moments of protocol contention in Bitcoin's history, where chain splits and divergent rule enforcement have tested the resilience of the network and the adaptability of its participants. For context, American Bitcoin's recent decision to pledge a significant portion of its reserves for mining equipment highlights how operational and technical risks can intersect for miners facing uncertain network conditions-see the analysis at how mining collateral decisions can amplify exposure during protocol changes.
According to available monitoring data, BIP-110 signaling stood at 2.62% as of August 7, 2026, with only 48 out of 1,831 blocks in the current period indicating support. The mandatory signaling phase is set to begin at block 961,632, with lock-in and activation scheduled for blocks 963,648 and 965,664, respectively. These figures underscore the low level of miner engagement and the technical thresholds that must be met for the proposal to take effect across the network.
Soft forks like BIP-110 illustrate the complexities of protocol upgrades in decentralized networks. Unlike hard forks, which create clear splits, soft forks rely on broad consensus and miner participation to avoid fragmentation. When signaling is low and enforcement is not universal, the risk of chain splits, orphaned blocks, and inconsistent validation increases. For users, exchanges, and infrastructure providers, these episodes highlight the importance of monitoring network conditions, understanding client behavior, and preparing for operational contingencies when protocol changes are proposed but not widely adopted.
