I agree that the 42-node limit should also apply to clusters—otherwise, it would be easy to circumvent the limit. We should consider formalizing this, for example in a follow-up motion proposal after the pilot for the independence assessment.
As previously mentioned, some flexibility could be applied to existing clusters: A slight breach of the 42-node limit, say up to 50 nodes, is not a major issue and could be acceptable for an interim period. If a cluster significantly exceeds the 42 limit (which I hope is not the case), it becomes more urgent to restructure the node ownership to maintain fairness, especially given that other node providers have sold excess nodes to meet the target.