The number of Bitcoin (BTC) nodes reporting support for Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110), a temporary soft fork limiting the amount of data included in each transaction at the consensus level, increased to 2.38%.
583 nodes out of 24,481 are running BIP-110, and the primary software implementation of the node to run the soft fork proposal is Bitcoin Knots, according to at the Bitcoin portal.
BIP-110 limits the size of transaction outputs to 34 bytes and caps the OP_RETURN data limit at 83 bytes. The temporary soft fork will be deployed for 1 year, with possible extension or modification after the 1 year duration, depending on the proposal. GitHub page.
OP_RETURN is a script code that allows users to embed arbitrary data and has been the subject of intense debate within the Bitcoin community following the release of Bitcoin Core version 30, the latest update to the most widely used Bitcoin node software.
The OP_RETURN limit was capped at 83 bytes, which Bitcoin Core Developers Unilaterally Removed in Bitcoin Core version 30, following a controversial pull request, first proposed in April 2025. The proposal was generally opposite by the Bitcoin community.
Related: Bitcoiners Reject Quantum Computing Fears as Cause of Price Drop
Arbitrary data problem creates division within Bitcoin community
The Bitcoin Core update that removed the data limit was put online in October 2025triggering a torrent of negative comments critics, who say removing the arbitrary data limit encourages spam on the Bitcoin ledger.
Arbitrary data increases storage costs run a Bitcoin nodeand the prohibitive cost leads to increased centralization of the Bitcoin network.
Bitcoin nodes can be run on consumer computers, unlike high-throughput blockchains which generate large amounts of data and require specialized hardware.
Critics say increasing node hardware requirements undermine the Bitcoin protocol’s value proposition as a decentralized currency network. Matthew Kratter, Bitcoin advocate and educator said:
“It’s like if one of these parasitic plants, like ivy, completely covered a tree, devoured it, and then the interior scaffolding collapsed, and the ivy collapsed because it basically destroyed the structure. That’s what spam has the potential to do to Bitcoin.”
Others, like Bitcoin Core contributor Jameson Lopp, support the uncapped OP_Return limit, argue that filters don’t do much to stop spam on the network.
Review: Big Questions: Would Bitcoin Survive a 10-Year Power Outage?
