MikroTik

Our ISP gave us a WAN IP x.x.x.2/30 and public Ip block x.x.x.8/29. My question is, is this necessary to put a L3 router (mine was CCR1009) to put on edge of the netowrk to access ISP Lan Ip's(x.x.x.8/29).

I have no solution so I put a CCR1009 for that task. Is I am doing right? Please there is anybody who can help me on this?

Do you want use the second router ? Is GW for /29 different from this one for /30 ?
One router should be enough. Assign x.x.x.2/30 to WAN interface, set up routing and that's all.
To make use of rest of /29 subnet addresses you can "virtualize" WANs and assign addresses to the same WAN interface but all firewall/NAT rules should operate then on particular address for each "virtual" WAN instead of one common WAN interface name as router needs to differentiate data streams for each address.
If you want one address per interface then assign addresses to selected ports of your router and connect all these interfaces to the external switch and this switch to ISP network. If you want separated WAN interfaces you should remeber that each one should have no master-port set in the interface configuration. You can also set DHCP client for these ports to let ISP assign addresses and GW for them as each port has it's own MAC address.

Sorry WAN IP is x.x.x.0/30 and LAN IP's x.x.x.8/29.
No I don't want another CCR1009 for the same.
My main concern is why should I use a dedicated CCR1009 for WAN to LAN conversion of ISP link. There should be an another cheap alternative device that will do the same on 500 MB traffic. May be I am wrong, please suggest!

Here is anybody who can suggest me more better?

Why use socond router??? Isp give you one ip block routed to your ip. It is simple routing. Assing your wan ip to interface connected to isp and first ip from lan block to lan master interface or bridge if you have one. No need for nat if there are public ips. If they arent you have to nat. If you wonder why to use a ccr for 500 Mbps i don`t think you will get another cheap alternative to perform well at this speed.

Why use socond router??? Isp give you one ip block routed to your ip. It is simple routing. Assing your wan ip to interface connected to isp and first ip from lan block to lan master interface or bridge if you have one. No need for nat if there are public ips. If they arent you have to nat. If you wonder why to use a ccr for 500 Mbps i don`t think you will get another cheap alternative to perform well at this speed.

Thanks, I got it.
So every ISP who given me routed ip block I always need a CCR or L3 router to use routed IP's.
if we have two ISP or more all are providing their separated routed IP's, to use theme each bandwidth should have separate CCR. Is this right what I am thinking? Further, then for load-balancing I need another CCR.

Like this:
WAN1->CCR1->Lan1->CCR3->lan3->all users
WAN2->CCR2>Lan2->CCR3->lan3->all users

CCR1=use for ISP1 termination
CCR2=use for ISP2 termination
CCR3=use for loadbalancing.

or all task can be done on single CCR. Now, i am confused here.

You can connect any number of ISPs to only one router. It's just a matter of free ports, vlans or whatever. Also it's a little harder to set up properly, because you need to make sure that traffic gets routed to right ISP, etc.

Most examples I've seen deal with load balancing (like this one), which is not exactly what you need, but it might give you some ideas. In your case, with public addresses, you don't need NAT and can't route them to different ISPs. But stuff like different routing tables and marking connections is the same.