Bitcoin’s BIP-110 enters mandatory signaling with miner support below 3%
Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) has entered its mandatory-signaling phase, with miners signaling support in just 51 of the preceding 2,016 blocks, or 2.53%, well below the 55% threshold required for early activation.
Intelligence analysis by Llama
Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) has entered its mandatory-signaling phase, with miners signaling support in just 51 of the preceding 2,016 blocks, or 2.53%, well below the 55% threshold required for early activation. This milestone tests whether enforcing nodes can sustain the change amid limited miner signaling and discussion of a hard-fork fallback.
Imagine you're playing a game with your friends, and you all agree to follow some rules. But then, one of your friends wants to change the rules, but not everyone agrees. This is kind of like what's happening with Bitcoin and BIP-110. Some people want to change the way the game is played, but others don't think it's a good idea. They're trying to figure out if they can make the change work even if not everyone agrees.
Analysis
BIP-110: A Proposal for Temporary Consensus Restrictions
Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) is a proposal to introduce temporary consensus restrictions on the Bitcoin network. The proposal, written by pseudonymous developer Dathon Ohm, aims to limit the amount of data that can be stored on the Bitcoin blockchain. The proposal would restrict most new output scripts to 34 bytes, cap OP_RETURN outputs at 83 bytes, restrict certain data pushes and witness elements to 256 bytes, and temporarily limit several Taproot features. Unspent transaction outputs created before activation would be exempt.
Supporters of BIP-110 argue that the restrictions would discourage inscriptions and other non-monetary data that increase storage and bandwidth costs for node operators. However, critics of the proposal, including Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and Blockstream CEO Adam Back, have argued that the proposal could divide Bitcoin and cause nodes to reject transactions permitted under the network's existing rules.
The Deployment Schedule
The proposal uses version bit 4 for miner signaling. Its deployment schedule sets blocks 961,632 through 963,647 as a mandatory-signaling window, during which nodes enforcing BIP-110 reject blocks that do not carry the signal. The specification defines block 963,648 as the beginning of its locked-in state and block 965,664 as the point when its transaction restrictions take effect.
A Hard-Fork Fallback
Proponents of BIP-110 have also discussed a more extensive fallback. On Aug. 1, Bitcoin developer Chris Guida rebased preliminary code for a proof-of-work change originally written by Bitcoin Knots maintainer Luke Dashjr. Guida described the code at the time as a contingency if miners opposed BIP-110, but said no activation date had been set.
Key points
- Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110) has entered its mandatory-signaling phase.
- Miners are signaling support for BIP-110 at a rate of 2.53%, well below the 55% threshold required for early activation.
- BIP-110 proposes temporary consensus restrictions on the Bitcoin network, including limits on data storage and transaction sizes.
- Supporters of BIP-110 argue that the restrictions would discourage inscriptions and other non-monetary data that increase storage and bandwidth costs for node operators.
- Critics of the proposal, including Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor and Blockstream CEO Adam Back, have argued that the proposal could divide Bitcoin and cause nodes to reject transactions permitted under the network's existing rules.
If BIP-110 is successful, it could lead to a more efficient and secure Bitcoin network. The proposal's restrictions on data storage could help reduce the costs associated with running a node, making it more accessible to a wider range of users.
However, if BIP-110 is not successful, it could lead to a division within the Bitcoin community and potentially even a hard fork. This could result in a loss of trust and confidence in the network, leading to a decline in its value and adoption.
