AFAICT, as of commit a0a422c,  we have 2 different logics to evict outbound peers : lagging-chain (`ConsiderEviction`) and (`CheckForStaleTipAndEvictPeers`). The former to sanitize out lazy/buggy peers who have never sent us a valid header and are always staying behind our tip, the latter triggered in case of stale tip due to block variance to seek a better chain by rotating our outbound peers if we already reach an outbound limit (`EvictExtraOutboundPeers`).

Block-relay-only peers were introduced by #15719. Contrary to outbound full-relay peers who provided us at least a useful header, they're not protected by lagging-chain eviction.

We actually have a comment inside `ProcessHeadersMessage` indicating the contrary behavior. We should either document cleanly that block-relay-only aren't protected or effectively extend the scope of protection to them.

Hinted during #19724 review, see https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/19724#discussion_r475144532
{
    const CNetMsgMaker msgMaker(pfrom.GetCommonVersion());
    size_t nCount = headers.size();
    if (nCount == 0) {
        
        return;
    }
    bool received_new_header = false;
    const CBlockIndex *pindexLast = nullptr;
    {
        LOCK(cs_main);
        CNodeState *nodestate = State(pfrom.GetId());
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        
        if (!LookupBlockIndex(headers[0].hashPrevBlock) && nCount < MAX_BLOCKS_TO_ANNOUNCE) {
            nodestate->nUnconnectingHeaders++;
            m_connman.PushMessage(&pfrom, msgMaker.Make(NetMsgType::GETHEADERS, ::ChainActive().GetLocator(pindexBestHeader), uint256()));
            LogPrint(BCLog::NET, "received header %s: missing prev block %s, sending getheaders (%d) to end (peer=%d, nUnconnectingHeaders=%d)\n",