# ZK Rollups as Parachains **URL:** \ **Category:** Tech Talk\ **Created:** [March 5, 2023, 11:32pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/zk-rollups-as-parachains/2229 "2023-03-05T23:32:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 8
**Author:** ![rphmeier](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex005/user_avatar/forum.polkadot.network/rphmeier/32/126_2.png) [@rphmeier](https://forum.polkadot.network/u/rphmeier)\ **Post date:** [March 9, 2023, 9:40pm UTC](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/zk-rollups-as-parachains/2229/8 "2023-03-09T21:40:38Z")
I think with the notion of [Data Availability as a Service](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/data-availability-as-a-service/2279) we can focus entirely on ZK rollups that live on top of parachains. That said, I think that there are a few not-specifically-technical reasons to support this at the base layer: - It’s not clear exactly how good ZK rollup scaling is going to get. Future-proofing Polkadot to be able to adapt to a full ZK scaling approach is a useful strategic hedge, even though Wasm parachains should be notably faster for the foreseeable future. - The development focus on ZK Rollups is substantive, and it’d be useful for Polkadot to make inroads at a protocol level for this developer audience. This should help cement Polkadot as an innovation hub, particularly among smart ZK folks. @burdges I don’t fully understand what you mean by Whole Block Optimizations, but maybe you could make a separate post outlining how that might work from top-to-bottom? --- _[View the full topic](https://forum.polkadot.network/t/zk-rollups-as-parachains/2229)._