Discussion on the BIP-110 Proposal and the Potential Role of Fractal

Recently, community discussions around the BIP-110 proposal have been heating up. The proposal suggests temporarily limiting the size of certain data fields at the consensus layer to correct incentive distortions arising from standardized support for arbitrary data, and refocusing priorities on enhancing Bitcoin’s function as money.

We believe that such discussions themselves demonstrate the strength of Bitcoin as a decentralized consensus system. Over the past decade, the Bitcoin network has consistently allowed for the coexistence of different ideas and technical approaches. From the SegWit2x controversy in 2017 to the subsequent Bitcoin Cash fork, the system has shown a continuous ability to evolve even in the presence of disagreements.

Currently, the node signaling ratio for BIP-110 is showing an upward trend. According to public data:

• January 25, 2026: 2.98% (729 / 24482 nodes)
• February 23, 2026: 7.99% (1995 / 24981 nodes)

BIP-110 Ready Nodes

This represents an increase of approximately 5% within a month. Whether this proposal will ultimately reach the activation threshold remains uncertain and requires ongoing observation.

Against this backdrop, we believe that products and services within the Bitcoin ecosystem should be technically prepared for various possible outcomes, rather than making judgments based on emotional stances or predetermined results.

Fractal’s Design Philosophy and Role

One of the core design goals of Fractal Bitcoin is to provide an environment capable of supporting more complex states and data expression without altering the consensus rules of the Bitcoin mainnet.

If the mainnet adopts stricter limitations on certain data types at the consensus layer in the future, Fractal can serve as a technically compatible extension layer, offering an alternative path for asset state continuity.

As we previously discussed:

For Ordinals, censorship on Bitcoin has always been a concrete and clear risk. If Bitcoin maintainers one day take the stance that ‘Ordinals are spam and should be blocked in future versions,’ Fractal Bitcoin can preserve all Bitcoin mainnet inscriptions via mirroring with minimal additional data overhead—amounting to only 1/38th the data size of the original.

It is important to emphasize that:

• Fractal is not an alternative fork.
• It is not an adversarial response to mainnet decisions.
• It does not presuppose any specific governance outcome.

Its role is more akin to a “buffer layer,” providing continuity guarantees for assets across different stages of consensus evolution.

Possible Scenarios Regarding “Temporary Limitations”

BIP-110 is described as a one-year temporary limitation.

In such a scenario, if related assets are constrained on the mainnet, Fractal can serve as a temporary hosting environment. If the limitations are lifted after a year, assets can also return to the mainnet.

There is still room for further research and optimization regarding the specific technical implementation path, but the principles are clear:

• Do not break mainnet consensus.
• Do not force migration.
• Do not create market panic.
• Only provide optional solutions.

Our Stance

As ecosystem participants, we respect the consensus outcome ultimately formed by Bitcoin.

Regardless of the direction BIP-110 takes, the healthy development of the ecosystem should not be built on opposition, but on technical preparedness and rational discussion.

The existence of Fractal is not to create division, but to provide a technical buffer space when disagreements arise.

This article is sourced from the internet: Discussion on the BIP-110 Proposal and the Potential Role of Fractal