How to accept two providers with their own networks in Cisco 2911 without NAT?

Question

Cisco

There is Cisco 2911 securityk9. It comes with two physical uplinks.
1. Uplink 1: a /30 PtP network arrives, for which the provider's /26 is routed. Actually, the default gateway of this provider is registered on the router (an address that is located in the PtP network). Everything works, everyone is happy.
2. Uplink 2: came later. while there is only / 30 (only one address that hangs on the router itself). It is used as an opportunity to climb onto the router and see what's what. For nothing else.
Task: if I connect to the router via SSH through the second uplink, I need to drive reverse traffic through the second one as well.
Research: make the second uplink also the default gateway, but with a larger metric. Not suitable as a crutch, remains as a fallback. Route-map: it's not very clear how and on which interface to hang up. IP sla: not supported by a license and there are also many questions about where and how to hang it.
Case number two: the second provider routes, say, / 28 for its uplink and I want to simultaneously route two networks along my routes.
Now:

[ISP1-10.1.0.1/30]---[10.1.0.2/30-Router-10.1.1.1/26]---[10.1.1.2-62-Servers]
[ISP2-10.2.0.1/30]---[10.2.0.2/30-Router]

If I go to 10.2.0.2, then the reverse traffic still goes through ISP1.
Later:

[ISP1-10.1.0.1/30]---[10.1.0.2/30-Router-10.1.1.1/26]---[10.1.1.2-62-Servers]
[ISP2-10.2.0.1/30]---[10.2.0.2/30-Router-10.2.1.1/28]---[10.2.1.2-14-Servers]

And here, in addition to everything, it is necessary that everyone from 10.1.1.0/26 go through 10.1.0.1, and from 10.2.1.0/28 through 10.2.0.1.
Auto-switching is not needed, there is no NAT in any form.

Answer 1

If you only need SSH to the router, you can wrap the second interface on a separate VRF with other routes.
What's wrong with route-map? We hang up on the second interface and forward. This also applies to the second case.