Hello Gert,
>So, in the RIPE service region, which countries would qualify as
>"less developed countries"? By which metric?
Determining which countries qualify as "less/least developed countries" within the RIPE service region is indeed a crucial aspect of this proposal. Typically, metrics such as GDP per capital, internet penetration rates, and infrastructure development could be considered to identify these countries.
>Since there are not many /24s available, and the waiting list is long,
>it's hard to see how this would make a tangible benefit for the not
>very clearly specified beneficiaries
I am late but not too late with such restrictions about two membership per entitiy, since this should be implemented long time ago, if you check the allocations:
https://rex.apnic.net/resources?rir=ripencc you will see an entity with more than 20 multilir accounts hoarding the IPv4 space, for only purpose to lease them out and not using them for theirself! And as such, that's why we have that long waiting list. I do believe that there is still time in which we can prevent it.
>How can "you can have more IPv4 space" encourage IPv6 deployment?
If you have read my proposal carefully i said: This special consideration aims to support the growth and development of internet infrastructure in these countries, allowing them to meet their addressing needs while transitioning to IPv6 gradually due to their old/infrastructure...
Cheers.