Bitaigen Research 
As of the latest statistics in May 2026, there are roughly 24,481 Bitcoin full nodes worldwide, of which 583 have enabled BIP‑110. The proportion of BIP‑110‑enabled nodes has risen to 2.38 %, indicating that the debate over network spam has become increasingly heated after the soft‑fork limiting transaction data took effect.
BIP‑110 is a temporary soft fork designed to restrict the amount of data that each transaction can carry at the consensus layer. The proposal caps transaction output size at 34 bytes and limits OP_RETURN data to 83 bytes. According to the description on GitHub, this soft fork is planned for a one‑year deployment; once the period expires the community may choose to extend or modify it based on demand.
BIP‑110 deployment schedule (source: BIP‑110.org)
OP_RETURN is a script opcode that permits arbitrary data to be embedded in a transaction. Since the release of Bitcoin Core v30, it has become a focal point of controversy. That version removed the original 83‑byte limit, a change that originated from a contentious pull request submitted in April 2025 and was opposed by the majority of community members.
*Pull request proposing to drop the arbitrary‑data restriction* (source: GitHub)
In this article we review the recent real‑world deployment of the BIP‑110 soft fork, analyse how its transaction‑data caps have escalated the spam debate on the network, and assess the stance of various node operators along with potential ramifications. If you want to dive deeper into the technical details and community trajectory behind this development, keep reading.
The arbitrary‑data controversy creates a split within the Bitcoin community
The core update of October 2025 officially removed the data limit, and a wave of negative feedback followed. Critics argue that lifting the restriction will encourage spam to proliferate across the ledger, leading to:
- Higher storage costs, increasing the operational expense for node operators;
- Greater centralisation pressure, as only operators with ample resources could keep a node running.
Unlike high‑throughput blockchains that require specialised hardware, Bitcoin nodes are expected to run on ordinary consumer‑grade computers.
*Hardware requirements for running a Bitcoin node* (source: Cointelegraph)
Matthew Cratel, a Bitcoin advocate and educator, points out:
“It’s like a parasitic plant—ivy completely covering a tree until the trunk finally collapses. Spam’s potential impact on Bitcoin is analogous, eroding the network’s decentralised structure.”
Similarly, core contributors such as James Lope and others support the removal of the OP_RETURN cap, arguing that filters provide limited protection against spam.
---
The above constitutes a detailed analysis of Bitcoin (BTC) nodes running BIP‑110 surpassing the 2 % threshold and the ensuing spam war. For more coverage of the 2 % node support for BIP‑110 and the ongoing data‑spam debate, follow additional articles from Bitaigen (比特根).
Related Reading
- 黄金油价飙升，战争对冲失灵——比特币跌破预期
- Bitcoin Market Correction: 5 Factors Behind BTC's Sluggishness
- Howard Lutnick Calls Bitcoin a Commodity Like Gold & Oil
💡 Register on Binance with referral code B2345 for the maximum trading fee discount. See Binance complete guide.
