Legend speaks of a well known BGP community referred to as 'no export', which causes people with no direct connections to $carrier to not have to listen to all that extra junk while still engineering inbound traffic w/ more specifics for people who peer directly in diverse locations. Amazing!
Indeed, I know from personal experience the heartbreak of supplying no-export to a BGP peer who does not honor it, and propagates the more-specific prefixes that I give them globally.
2. Cut-outs for those pesky dot-coms; you know, the ones with the most compelling content on the Internet jumping up and down in your face with a need to multi-home their /24 to satisfy the crushing global demand for such essentials as "the hamster dance."
Ignoring inconsistent-as for a moment, the hamster dance multihoming doesn't make the parent upstream need to _originate_ anything of the sort.
Presumably inconsistent-as is the only way that a more-specific announced by a dual-homed customer would get charged to an origin AS on Tony's list; in such a case (and on reflection, it is much more of a corner case when inconsistent-as is involved, as you are correctly pointing out), the parent that provided the address space would need to originate that announcement if they wanted any of the traffic toward that prefix to use their network. Looking at "show ip bgp inconsistent-as," the number of prefixes that would be charged to Tony's list for AS701 as an origin is certainly small, if not non-existent. Ignoring the specifics of Tony's list for a moment, it has been pointed out in a couple NANOG presentations that the cut-outs associated with dual-homing (yes, the _propagated_ ones, as opposed to the _originated_ ones) are major contributors to recent routing-table growth. Given AS701's footprint, it's hard not to imagine them seeing more of that kind of thing than most. Stephen