1) I wouldn't defined the router to be inline but basically is a key component in the WAN bubble.
Your router provides network reachability for the assigned /24 subnet to the rest of the world.
I'm assuming your router is also providing NAT for the internal network?
Overall, your design is sound. I wouldn't change a thing.
2) Your assigned /24 subnet allows your internal network to reach the internet with a valid public IP address.
It also allow you to provide services such as WWW, Email, FTP, VPN to your external customers.
The redundancy comes into effect when both ISPs have network reachability towards your network while learning
this /24 subnet via BGP. At high level, BGP uses an internal path algorithm and chooses a preferred route after
comparing several attributes.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk365/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094431.shtml
In short, customers on Veracity will more than likely reach your network via the Veracity link (preferred metrics)
while customers on Integra would do the same on their own network. Other networks connectivity will be dictated based on how their connection is towards Veracity or Integra.
The redundancy comes into play when you lose one link and it's still known via another link.
This redundancy is provided with BGP and the way is advertised from router to router.
3) Default route is fine. However you are limited on the amount of traffic engineering you can do for traffic leaving your network. For instance, if you receive full or partial routes from both ISPs, BGP would prefer exiting via the Veracity link towards Veracity customers and the same can be said for Integra customers.
With the default route, the only option you have is having one link being primary while the other one as secondary.
You could implement multipath with BGP but I don't recommend it for ISP connectivity.
