The proportion of Bitcoin (BTC) nodes endorsing Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110 (BIP-110)—a temporary soft fork designed to restrict the amount of data allowed in each transaction at the consensus level—has increased to 2.38%.
Out of a total of 24,481 nodes, 583 are currently running BIP-110. The main software implementation supporting this soft fork is Bitcoin Knots, as reported by The Bitcoin Portal.
BIP-110 enforces a limit on transaction output sizes to 34 bytes and caps OP_RETURN data at 83 bytes. This temporary soft fork is set for deployment over one year, with potential extensions or modifications after that period according to its GitHub documentation.
OP_RETURN is a scripting opcode that enables users to embed arbitrary data within transactions. It has been highly debated within the Bitcoin community following the release of Bitcoin Core version 30—the latest upgrade for the most widely used node software.
Previously capped at an 83-byte limit, OP_RETURN’s restriction was removed unilaterally by Bitcoin Core developers in version 30 after a contentious pull request introduced in April 2025. This move faced significant opposition from many community members.
The removal of this arbitrary data cap went live in October 2025 and triggered widespread criticism from detractors who argue that lifting these limits encourages spam on the blockchain ledger.
This influx of arbitrary data raises storage demands for running full nodes, which could increase operational costs and push towards greater centralization within the network.
Unlike blockchains requiring specialized hardware due to high throughput and large datasets, running a standard Bitcoin node remains feasible on consumer-grade computers—an important factor for decentralization advocates.
Critics warn that escalating hardware requirements threaten Bitcoin’s core promise as a decentralized monetary system. Matthew Kratter—a well-known advocate and educator—illustrated this concern metaphorically:
“It's like one of those parasitic plants, such as ivy, completely engulfing a tree, eating it away until its internal structure collapses—and then both fall apart because the parasite has destroyed its host. This is what spam could potentially do to Bitcoin.”
Conversely, some supporters like Jameson Lopp—a contributor to Bitcoin Core—defend removing limits on OP_RETURN data size by asserting that filtering mechanisms have minimal effect against network spam overall.