BIP-110: Bitcoin Fork Deadline Approaches, Miner Support Remains at Zero
As the Bitcoin ecosystem approaches a major protocol deadline, the BIP-110 proposal is crystallizing tensions within the community. On this July 12, 2026, at 18:00 UTC, the observation is clear: miner support for this controversial update remains nonexistent, while the technical deadline set by core developers draws inexorably closer. Bitcoin was trading at $64,094.85 on Binance, a relatively stable level that contrasts with the political fervor surrounding what could become one of the most polarizing forks in the network’s history.
What is BIP-110?
BIP-110 (Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110) is a proposed modification to the Bitcoin protocol aimed at introducing specific scalability mechanisms for inscriptions and ordinals. Contrary to a common misconception, BIP-110 does not directly concern block size or the cap on standard transactions, but rather how additional data — especially that related to inscription protocols like Ordinals — is integrated and processed by the network.
This technical proposal emerges in a context where Bitcoin transaction fees have experienced significant spikes due to the influx of inscriptions and BRC-20 tokens. Proponents of BIP-110 believe a structural solution is necessary to prevent these secondary activities from congesting the network at the expense of the traditional financial transactions that Bitcoin has always prioritized. The proposal would introduce a new field in the transaction structure, allowing miners to more effectively distinguish between standard value transfers and inscription data.
A Protocol Deadline That Divides
The deadline associated with BIP-110 is not an arbitrary date, but the result of a development process that began several months ago. The core developers — those who maintain Bitcoin Core — have set a deployment window that, if not met, would push the implementation of the proposal to a later cycle. This “protocol deadline” mechanism is common in Bitcoin development: it creates a sense of urgency while ensuring that major changes are not adopted hastily without sufficient maturation.
However, as this deadline approaches, a striking phenomenon has emerged in discussions: miner support, measured by signals from their respective pools via the protocol’s version bits system, has remained strictly at zero. None of the major mining pools — whether Foundry USA, Antpool, F2Pool, ViaBTC, or Binance Pool — have publicly signaled their intention to activate BIP-110. This total absence of positive signaling constitutes a rare precedent in Bitcoin proposal history, where even the most contested forks typically manage to secure minority support.
Unanimous Opposition from Historical Figures
BIP-110 faces opposition that extends far beyond the ranks of miners. Michael Saylor, the executive chairman of MicroStrategy and one of the most fervent institutional advocates for Bitcoin, has spoken out against the proposal. His main argument rests on the simplicity and immutability of the protocol: any modification that complicates Bitcoin’s security model without immediate and massive benefit to the majority of users would, in his view, be a strategic error.
Adam Back, CEO of Blockstream and a founding figure in Bitcoin development, has also taken a stance against BIP-110. His criticism fits into a broader vision of how the protocol should evolve: Back favors second-layer solutions like the Lightning Network to handle non-financial use cases, rather than modifying the protocol base itself. His opposition carries even more weight given that he is one of the most respected cryptographers in the ecosystem.
Other prominent voices have joined this chorus of opposition, notably among the historical developers of Bitcoin Core. The emerging consensus is one of near-unanimous rejection of the approach proposed by BIP-110, even if the need to address the congestion problem related to ordinals is more widely agreed upon.
The Technical Narrative of a Significant Escalation
The editorial angle adopted by observers has evolved over the weeks. Initially perceived as a simple technical proposal intended for debate and then a vote, BIP-110 has gradually taken on the contours of a genuine protocol crisis. The fact that miner support has remained at zero as the deadline approaches transforms the nature of the subject: it is no longer a normal technical debate, but a warning signal about Bitcoin governance.
This escalation is significant in several respects. First, it reveals the fractures that exist between the different stakeholders in the ecosystem: developers who propose modifications, miners who must activate them, institutional investors who indirectly finance them, and users who bear the consequences of decisions. Second, it illustrates the difficulty of evolving a decentralized protocol when the incentives of different actors are not aligned.
BIP-110 thus becomes a case study for Bitcoin governance. Proposals that fail are not rare, but those that reach an advanced stage of development before hitting a wall of unanimous opposition are more instructive: they show where the red lines lie that the community is not prepared to cross.
Implications for the Bitcoin Market
The impact of BIP-110 on Bitcoin’s price has remained contained, at least for now. At $64,094.85, BTC has shown only minor variations in response to developments in this protocol saga. Several analysts attribute this stability to the fact that the market has already priced in the likely failure of the proposal: if miners do not support BIP-110, it will not be activated, and the status quo will prevail.
This status quo, however, is not without consequences. If no...
Analyse détaillée réservée aux membres
Notre équipe d'analystes a préparé une analyse complète avec données exclusives.
🔒 Paiement sécurisé • Stripe • Sans engagement
Déjà abonné ? Connectez-vous
