Full story
DOG Mode vs BIP-110
A new governance dispute over Bitcoin erupted after developer Leonidas introduced an alternative client called DOG Mode, reviving the question of who really controls the network.
“DOG Mode explains Bitcoin's next governance fight Leonidas' DOG Mode client challenges Bitcoin's default relay policies, reopening a philosophical debate over censorship, free markets and who really governs the network”
DOG Mode does not touch Bitcoin’s consensus rules, instead relaxing the default relay policies used by Bitcoin Core and other node software that decide which valid transactions get forwarded across the peer-to-peer network before miners include them in a block.
By loosening those defaults, the client aims to make it easier for non-standard and data-heavy transactions to propagate, and it frames the fight as whether individual node operators should be gatekeepers deciding which lawful transactions deserve to travel the network.
The proposal is described as the mirror image of BIP-110, which sought to tighten network rules to curb on-chain data storage, and it is tied to the Ordinals protocol that lets users inscribe images and text onto the Bitcoin blockchain to create NFT-like assets.
Leonidas argues that a valid, fee-paying transaction is a valid transaction, whether it carries a monetary payment or an inscription, while the BIP-110 side treats scarce block space as reserved primarily for monetary settlement.
Relay policy changes
In the DOG Mode proposal, Leonidas targets two specific relay policy settings in Bitcoin Core, including increasing the maximum standard transaction size from 400,000 weight units (WU) to 3.9 million WU, nearly the capacity of an entire block that holds 4 million WU.
The second change would slash the dust limit, the minimum output size a node will relay, from a range of roughly 294 to 546 satoshis down to just a single satoshi, which Leonidas says would reduce the need to “pad” outputs to clear the dust threshold.
Leonidas estimates that removing this floor would release approximately $25 million worth of bitcoin currently locked in inefficient transaction structures designed solely to satisfy relay policy requirements.
The proposal emphasizes that it does not propose a hard fork, a soft fork, or any alteration to Bitcoin’s consensus rules, and it argues that any transaction relayed through DOG Mode remains fully compatible once a miner includes it in a block.
In contrast, BIP-110 is described as a user-activated soft fork requiring 55% of miners to signal support, with a BIP-110 monitor cited as drawing zero support in the current signaling period and never clearing roughly 1% in any period.
Adoption, markets, and debate
The DOG Mode initiative is pitched as a way to make unusually large or non-standard transactions easier to propagate across the peer-to-peer network itself, potentially reducing the advantage held by institutional transaction brokers and private relay channels.
The proposal also raises the risk of mempool fragmentation, because if enough operators run divergent relay policies, different parts of the network could hold different sets of pending transactions even if consensus remains intact.
CoinDesk’s coverage frames the dispute as reopening a philosophical debate over censorship, free markets and who really governs the network, with DOG Mode positioned as the “philosophical mirror image of BIP-110.”
Beyond governance, CoinDesk’s market snapshot shows BTC at $64,657.35 and ETH at $1,858.33, while the Fear & Greed Index is described as printing 25 (Extreme Fear) with RSI at 53.78 and a bullish MACD in an otherwise sideways trend.
Whether DOG Mode gains meaningful adoption remains an open question in the reporting, but the dispute is presented as forcing Bitcoin to confront whether it functions as a public settlement network or a neutral, permissionless market for block space.
