Bitcoin BIP-110 Fork Stalls After Two Blocks as Main Chain Extends 113-Block Lead

Bitcoin’s BIP-110 Branch Stops at Block 961,633

The monitor’s two node tips point to a fork at the common height immediately before 961,632. Its BIP-110 node accepted blocks 961,632 and 961,633, while the standard node proceeded on a different branch through height 961,744.

This does not mean two equal Bitcoin networks are operating. The two-block figure describes the short enforcing branch after the split point, while the 113-block figure describes the longer standard-chain branch seen by the BIP-110 node as rejected. The monitor does not establish how much economic activity, custody infrastructure or node count is supporting either path.

It does establish a practical difference between a proposal and a rule in use. BIP-110’s document specifies the signaling condition, but its text alone cannot make standard nodes reject blocks. The earlier mandatory-window coverage recorded the start of this same debate before the node paths visibly diverged.

The ordinary main-chain signal data has not changed direction. The live monitor showed zero bit-4 signals across the 113 standard-chain blocks it had scanned from 961,632 through 961,744. That is an observation about block headers, not a vote count for all Bitcoin users or miners.

Main Bitcoin Chain Reaches Block 961,744

The 113-block standard branch included blocks attributed by the monitor to a range of pools, including Foundry USA, AntPool, F2Pool and OCEAN. None of the observed blocks carried the BIP-110 bit, according to its live signaling grid.

The largest height difference between the two node tips was 111 blocks, because the BIP-110 branch itself had reached 961,633. The 113-block branch length is measured from the shared pre-split height, so the two figures describe different parts of the same chain comparison.

Bitcoin’s difficulty adjusts every 2,016 blocks, a design that targets roughly 10-minute blocks under changing hashrate. A small branch retaining the same difficulty setting can take much longer to add blocks if it has only a limited portion of total hash power, although the monitor does not publish a complete hashrate measurement for the BIP-110 branch.

That mechanical constraint helps explain why a short branch can remain visible without challenging the faster chain’s tip. It also makes further directly observed blocks, rather than assumptions about miner intent, the useful test of whether the separation persists.

Bitcoin BIP-110 Split Leaves Users Watching Replay Risk

The branch is separate from a general failure of Bitcoin payments. No public evidence reviewed for this report showed failed ordinary transactions on the standard chain, a broad exchange notice or an instruction for holders to move ordinary BTC.

The immediate risk is narrower for anyone who tries to spend or trade coins as though the two histories were independently supported assets. When chains share earlier transaction history and do not use replay protection, a transaction constructed for one path can be valid on the other under some conditions. Wallet, exchange and custodian handling was not immediately disclosed.

The split also differs from a pool’s stated support process. Daily Crypto Briefs previously examined Foundry’s hashrate-weighted client vote, but a governance process and a block actually accepted by different node policies are separate evidence.

BIP-110 names block 963,648 as its no-later-than lock-in height and 965,664 as its proposed ACTIVE height. Neither value confirms an outcome, and the current two-block branch does not show activation on the standard chain.

The next checks are whether the enforcing branch finds additional blocks, whether standard-chain headers begin carrying bit 4, and whether wallet providers, exchanges or major mining pools publish operating guidance. Until then, the current data shows a live but thin divergence, not a completed replacement of Bitcoin’s main chain.