# Quadratic Pricing for Namespaces

**URL:** <https://forum.celestia.org/t/quadratic-pricing-for-namespaces/63>\
**Category:** Research\
**Created:** [September 15, 2021, 12:30pm UTC](https://forum.celestia.org/t/quadratic-pricing-for-namespaces/63 "2021-09-15T12:30:09Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 4

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![musalbas](https://forum.celestia.org/user_avatar/forum.celestia.org/musalbas/32/11_2.png) [@musalbas](https://forum.celestia.org/u/musalbas)\
**Post date:** [September 17, 2021, 1:52pm UTC](https://forum.celestia.org/t/quadratic-pricing-for-namespaces/63/4 "2021-09-17T13:52:54Z")

</div>

I like the idea of having quadratic pricing of fees per namespace, as this potentially allows fees per namespace to model fees of blocks more closely.

> Rollups that try to sidestep this scheme by using many different namespaces would take on performance and latency penalties in terms of P2P topic discovery, block validation, and DoS/spam resistance.

I’m not sure that these penalties are significant in practice. P2P topic discovery and block validation could probably be optimized to be as efficient as having a single namespace, and DoS resistance might not be an issue with [this mitigation](https://forum.celestia.org/t/woods-attack-on-celestia/59/2).

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.celestia.org/t/quadratic-pricing-for-namespaces/63)._