Is it possible to have two routers in the public accessible subnet?
->forward all traffic for [177.x.x.{3,5,7}]
Internet --- [177.x.x.1] ------------------------------------ [177.x.x.3]
/ | \ / \
/ | \ / \
[177.x.x.2] [177.x.x.4] [177.x.x.6] [177.x.x.5] [177.x.x.7]
The main router (177.x.x.1) is connected to WAN and forwards all the traffic (with destination IPs 177.x.x.3, 177.x.x.5, 177.x.x.7) to the second router (177.x.x.3), to which are connected several Machines, so that this second router (177.x.x.3) could route the traffic within (177.x.x.3, 177.x.x.5, 177.x.x.7 - number of single public IPs) as it normally would the main router (177.x.x.1) do? Besides that all the 177.x.x.2, 177.x.x.4, 177.x.x.6, 177.x.x.8 ... will be still managed by the main router (177.x.x.1). So I could isolate this three machines (177.x.x.3, 177.x.x.5, 177.x.x.7).
All this unusual structure because I have three public single (not a whole subnet - too expensive) IPs and a host, which I would like to do to the second router (177.x.x.3) and install virtual machines (177.x.x.5, 177.x.x.7). So the main router (177.x.x.1) is on the provider's side and I have no access to them, but I would like to manage my VMs with public IPs separately from the whole subnet (broadcast messages only between these three IPs, outgoing traffic rules only on the second router, etc.). All the other IPs in the subnet are foreign. So the bridged mode is not the solution, because then the main providers router will manage my whole part of network. It is more needed a routed mode, but I cannot find a good tutorial for doing this.