I have an existing network of servers running in a particular server room. From a socket on the wall we have a single CAT5e cable running into the FE0/WAN interface of our Cisco 1800 series router. A CAT5e cable runs from the FE1 interface on the router into an unmanaged HP 24x100/1000 switch. Our servers are connected to the unmanaged HP 24x100/1000 switch. The Cisco 1800 router is performing NAT. The Cisco 1800 routere's FE0 interface is configured with our WAN static IP, and this is accessible from the internet. Everything works just fine at present.
We are adding a second set of servers into the same room. They will be operating behind a completely different public IP address on a different subnet. Traffic for that IP address will be coming down the existing/same cable from the wall socket. The new/second network of servers will be on a separate local subnet.
If we will have two separate local networks, my understanding is that we need to add an additional switch. So a cable runs from the wall socket into a new switch. A cable runs from the new switch to our existing Cisco 1800, and another cable runs from the new switch to our new router for the new network. That way traffic for both public/wan IP addresses can get to their respective routers from the wall socket.
So if a new switch is required, then can we re-use the existing HP 24x100/1000 unmanaged switch? Thus;
A cable runs from the wall socket into the HP switch.
A cable runs from the HP switch into the FE0/WAN interface of the Cisco 1800.
A cable runs from the FE1/LAN interface of the Cisco 1800 into the HP switch.
A cable runs from the HP switch into the WAN interface of our new router.
A cable runs from the LAN interface of our new router into the HP switch.
All servers are connected to the HP switch.
Thus all traffic is distributed via the same switch on multiple subnets. Would this work, or would it be better to separate out the traffic first via a switch, or is there a better way of doing this?
