Bitcoin Network Splits Following BIP-110 Implementation at Block 961632

The Bitcoin blockchain split into two ledgers at block 961632 , creating a main chain that has continued to extend and a secondary branch tied to BIP-110 supporters that has not progressed beyond the divergence point.

Officials and participants tracking the event said the bifurcation coincided with a 0.99% rise in mining difficulty. At the time of the split, competing mining entities generated incompatible block templates, producing blocks that were not mutually accepted across the two rule-sets.

How the network diverged at block 961632

Large mining pools remained on the primary chain Large mining pools remained on the primary chain, while smaller groups backed the BIP-110 implementation. As a result, the main chain continued to add blocks, preserving normal forward movement for users and services that did not adopt the BIP-110 branch.

By contrast, the BIP-110-aligned chain has remained stalled at the fork point. The source material attributes this to inadequate hashrate, which has undermined operational stability and led to prolonged delays in block creation on that branch.

Conditions on the BIP-110 branch The secondary ledger’s lack of progress means activity on that network can become difficult to confirm in a timely way. With limited mining power supporting it, the branch may be unable to sustain predictable block intervals, affecting both the user experience and the reliability of confirmations for any transactions made under the BIP-110 rules.

The Bitcoin

The source material also notes the branch could remain inactive for a long period unless its supporters modify the proof-of-work consensus mechanism. No specific change is described, and there is no stated timeline for any adjustment.

Transaction finality and operational risk

The split introduces technical uncertainty for participants who interact with the BIP-110 protocol, particularly around network integrity and transaction finality. In a two-ledger environment, differing acceptance rules can create mismatched views of which transactions are confirmed, especially if one chain lacks consistent block production.

Institutional stakeholders were urged in the source material to monitor the situation for potential volatility and operational risks, including the possibility of chain reorganization or extended instability. The immediate uncertainty, based on the information provided, centers on whether the stalled branch can resume steady production and how long dual-ledger conditions may persist.