I generally agree with what Kano wrote above.
The problem with the upcoming 2x is actually BIP91.
Some believed BIP91 was the /NYA/ agreement, but instead it was simply a lock in for segwit, and nothing more.
While most blocks show /NYA/ in their coinbase transaction, that doesn't affect the upcoming 2x change.
The percentage of blocks signing /NYA/ is currently floating around 89% to 92%. This is why I think that Segwit2x is the future of Bitcoin. The percentage supporting BIP91 was similar when BIP91 was active.
According to the NYA, bit 4 was intended to be a signal for Segwit2x, and when btc1 is queried for the required softforks via GBT, btc1 has included segwit2x since bit 4 was triggered. Bit 4 is also supposed to be BIP91, so bit 4 is ambiguous. /NYA/ is unambiguous, but non-binding.
It's worth mentioning that Segwit2x can only exist if it has a majority of the hashrate. If your definition of Bitcoin is the post-fork chain with the most hashrate, then Segwit2x will either be Bitcoin or it won't exist. It's only if your definition of Bitcoin is Bitcoin Core that Segwit2x can be an altcoin.
Whatever. It shouldn't be too hard to get p2pool to support all three Bitcoins. It looks like I'll have a little bit of time later tonight, so I'll see what I can get done.