basic network configuation

I am implementing an new windows 2003 server to replace a windows 2000
server.
Its only functions are 1) to provide sql server services, 2) run PHP
and 3) IIS
to support a web based database application viewable from Inside the
office, as well as externally over the internet for our private use
only.
The current (old) topology is as follows:

___________________________
| Internet- fixed IP Addr |
___________________________
|
______________ ______________________
| 2003 Server | | basic dsl router |
______________ _______________________
| |
________________________
| Hub/switch |
_________________________
| | |
pc pc pc

The server is available over the internet through a pinhole in the
router.

It has been suggested to instead set up the new server, with two NICs
as
follows:

___________________________
| Internet- fixed IP Addr |
___________________________
|
______________________
| basic dsl router |
_______________________
|
_____________________
| 2003 server |
______________________
|
________________________
| Hub/switch |
_________________________
| | |
pc pc pc


in which all internet traffic would go through the server. Any thoughts
on this
simple network architecture?, or what is the most prefered basic setup?

"Jim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com...
> The server is available over the internet through a pinhole in the
> router.

Pinhole? You mean Static NAT (often improperly called "Port Forwarding")?

Yes, that is the best way (IMO).

All machines have a single nic, all on the normal LAN. Only the NAT Device
has two interfaces and sits on the networks's "edge". The NAT Device then
uses Static NAT to make the the internal web site available to the
"outside".

--
Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com

Thank you for your input, Phillip.

The current 2000 server has an open port which the router forwards to
the server, so the server is seen on the Internet as something like
http://123.456.789:xx where xx is the open port for http. I have no
other NAT device currently. The new 2003 server sports 2 NICs, but I
suppose I don't need the 2nd one for anything?

I see no reason or use for the second nic.


--
Phillip Windell [MCP, MVP, CCNA]
www.wandtv.com

"Jim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> Thank you for your input, Phillip.
>
> The current 2000 server has an open port which the router forwards to
> the server, so the server is seen on the Internet as something like
> http://123.456.789:xx where xx is the open port for http. I have no
> other NAT device currently. The new 2003 server sports 2 NICs, but I
> suppose I don't need the 2nd one for anything?
>