BIP110 Signaling Chain Stalls After Two Blocks, Bitcoin Fork Gap Widens to 88 Blocks

Bitcoin's BIP110-enforcing branch has effectively stalled after mining only two blocks, pushing its gap versus the non-enforcing chain out to 88 blocks. A BIP110 monitoring dashboard update (10:19 a.m. UTC) showed the enforcing branch last observed at block 961,633, following a long pause after its prior block. Over the same period, the non-enforcing chain continued to extend, reaching block 961,721, highlighting how little hashpower is currently supporting the enforcing side. Key points - The enforcing branch produced just two blocks before stalling; the non-enforcing chain kept advancing, widening the separation to 88 blocks. - The divergence began when BIP110 entered mandatory signaling at block 961,632. In the preceding 2,016-block window, only 51 blocks (2.53%) signaled support. - Mandatory signaling is set to run through block 963,647. Difficulty relief on the enforcing side will not arrive until that branch mines through the remainder of the current 2,016-block adjustment period. - Ocean-linked records cited by the monitor attribute the enforcing branch's first blocks to a pseudonymous group using Ocean's DATUM mining protocol. How the split formed The fork traces to BIP110 moving into mandatory signaling mode at block 961,632. Under BIP110, enforcing nodes reject blocks that do not signal using version bit 4. Standard Bitcoin nodes, by contrast, continue to accept both signaling and non-signaling blocks. If too few miners produce bit-4 signaling blocks during the mandatory phase, the enforcing chain can lag materially. The BIPs repository documentation indicates mandatory signaling continues through block 963,647. Until the enforcing side progresses far enough to complete the remainder of the current 2,016-block adjustment window, its difficulty target cannot reset to match its conditions, leaving it vulnerable to prolonged delays when supporting hashpower is scarce. Stalling and the difficulty window constraint Even with enforcement rules active, block cadence is still governed by Bitcoin's difficulty mechanics. The enforcing branch cannot benefit from a difficulty adjustment until it advances sufficiently within the current window. According to Ocean records referenced in the monitor coverage, a pseudonymous group identified as Roughnecks mined the first two enforcing-branch blocks using Ocean's Decentralized Alternative Templates for Universal Mining (DATUM) protocol. Those blocks underpin the enforcing chain tip seen at 961,633, after which block production slowed sharply. With the non-enforcing chain at 961,721, the head-to-head gap expanded rapidly once the enforcing side stopped producing blocks consistently. The episode underscores a practical reality: "mandatory signaling" does not guarantee steady block production on the enforcing branch if only a limited set of miners is willing to follow version bit 4. What BIP110 requires and why critics object BIP110's mechanism is straightforward: enforcing nodes require a specific version-bit signal, while ordinary nodes tolerate both signaled and non-signaled blocks. Supporters frame the approach as a way to curb unwanted data patterns tied to broader debates about spam and template behavior. The proposal has also drawn prominent criticism. Cointelegraph previously reported that Strategy executive chairman Michael Saylor supports the broader goals but argued the method threatens Bitcoin's "neutral rules" and consensus integrity. Separately, Blockstream CEO Adam Back has warned that a consensus-level change could hurt Bitcoin's credibility and may render certain unspent transaction outputs unspendable, according to earlier Cointelegraph reporting. What to watch Attention now turns to whether more miners begin signaling in greater numbers as the mandatory window runs through block 963,647, and whether the enforcing branch can improve block production before it reaches its next difficulty adjustment opportunity. If hashpower aligned with version bit 4 remains thin, the enforcing chain may continue to fall behind, turning a protocol rule change into a real-time test of miner participation.