# \[Proposal\] - Fernet on the Rocks

**URL:** <https://forum.aztec.network/t/proposal-fernet-on-the-rocks/2460>\
**Category:** Aztec\
**Tags:** rfp, provers\
**Created:** [October 25, 2023, 4:53pm UTC](https://forum.aztec.network/t/proposal-fernet-on-the-rocks/2460 "2023-10-25T16:53:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Anon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/47e85d/32.png) [@Anon](https://forum.aztec.network/u/Anon)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2023, 8:02pm UTC](https://forum.aztec.network/t/proposal-fernet-on-the-rocks/2460/2 "2023-10-25T20:02:53Z")

</div>

~$2M to take the network offline for 1 day is too low. [Based Rollup](http://forum.aztec.network/t/proposal-based-rollup-simple-decentralized-tokenless-sequencerless-l2/479) offers perfect liveness.

> [@cooper-aztecLabs](#):
>
> eventually they would drive the token price up

This doesn’t matter as long as deposits are pegged to 32 ETH. We can instead set deposits to `max(32 ETH, 32-eth-at-launch-token)`, though a drop in token value will leave current stakers under-collateralized (and therefore bribable).

> [@cooper-aztecLabs](#):
>
> so they could build as big of a block as possible

If you allow dynamic block sizes, hardware requirements for sequencers effectively increase to the maximum size.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.aztec.network/t/proposal-fernet-on-the-rocks/2460)._