SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37
  1. #1
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Unhappy GoDaddy: Are you REALLY getting 301 on your forwarded domains?

    i selected a few domains to be forwarded using the 301 option (under "domain forwarding") but many server header check tools are showing these redirects as a 302.

    has anyone else checked on their forwarded domains lately? are you getting a 301 if you chose 301 when you created the forward?

    as a side note, godaddy says "some search engines might identify a 301 redirect as a 302", which makes no sense to me. i called customer service for more explanation on what they mean by that and all i got was "thats the way some search engines work."

  2. #2
    SitePoint Wizard
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    1,863
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    You can always find a new web host if you are not happy with the redirects.

    I was on Go Daddy for over a year until I moved to a new host. I found I could do so much more and be more productive on a real web host. Server wasn't overloaded, either.

  3. #3
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by cheesedude View Post
    You can always find a new web host if you are not happy with the redirects.
    i'm not a godaddy hosting customer. my question refers exclusively to the redirect option available for parked domains in the domain control panel.

  4. #4
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If it's for parked domains, then this has little relevancy to SEO anyway, so I wouldn't worry.
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  5. #5
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    If it's for parked domains, then this has little relevancy to SEO anyway, so I wouldn't worry.
    i think you are misunderstanding the issue. in go daddy's control panel, you are able to FORWARD parked domains to another address by choosing either a 301 or a 302 redirect. using the 301 redirect would act much like an IP tunnel, hence the relevancy of this question to SEO efforts.

    thanks

  6. #6
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I don't know exactly what you mean by an IP tunnel to be honest. If you are concerned about it then you could turn off all forwarding on the domain, and just put up a simple PHP script to do a 301 redirect? Or do it through Apache's mod_rewrite?
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  7. #7
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lurke skywalker View Post
    i selected a few domains to be forwarded using the 301 option (under "domain forwarding") but many server header check tools are showing these redirects as a 302.

    has anyone else checked on their forwarded domains lately? are you getting a 301 if you chose 301 when you created the forward?

    as a side note, godaddy says "some search engines might identify a 301 redirect as a 302", which makes no sense to me. i called customer service for more explanation on what they mean by that and all i got was "thats the way some search engines work."
    Either it's a 301 or it's not. You can use the firefox LiveHTTP Headers extension to check.
    For people who aren't understanding the issue, he wants to do a permanent redirect from one domain to another at his registrar GoDaddy instead of pointing it to his host's nameservers and serving the 301 there. While there's no SEO benefit of doing it at the registrar level, it saves the leg work of adding the domain onto his host account and then setting up the redirect there. If GoDaddy is doing 302s then he is losing out on any search engine benefit of redirecting the domain.

  8. #8
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's pretty much what I thought was going on - what I meant by my original post is that there isn't any SEO benefit to 301ing parked domains to your site, unless you're going to build links to the parked domain, which would seem a slightly odd thing to do.
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  9. #9
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    I don't know exactly what you mean by an IP tunnel to be honest. If you are concerned about it then you could turn off all forwarding on the domain, and just put up a simple PHP script to do a 301 redirect? Or do it through Apache's mod_rewrite?
    yes, i could also use that method. but funneling too many domains thru a single IP is not advised and i already have a funnel running on at least one IP in each class C network i have access to. it's better to spread out the funnels over as many class C networks as you can. this is just me just trying to be safe... it is not information i found in some "IP funnel manual"

    if you wanna know what an IP funnel is just ask the big G
    http://www.google.com/search?q=ip+funnel

  10. #10
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by aaronjj View Post
    Either it's a 301 or it's not. You can use the firefox LiveHTTP Headers extension to check.
    For people who aren't understanding the issue, he wants to do a permanent redirect from one domain to another at his registrar GoDaddy instead of pointing it to his host's nameservers and serving the 301 there.
    thats why godaddy's disclaimer doesnt make any sense. they said your redirect type should go in effect in 24 hrs, and i just REdid all of them to use 301. if they are not 301ing by tomorrow morning i'm going to get all of them off godaddy and setup another funnel.

    Quote Originally Posted by aaronjj View Post
    While there's no SEO benefit of doing it at the registrar level, it saves the leg work of adding the domain onto his host account and then setting up the redirect there. If GoDaddy is doing 302s then he is losing out on any search engine benefit of redirecting the domain.
    while this aspect of my question isnt strictly SEO, this forum is the most appropriate place for this topic IMHO. what i am mainly looking for is to catch type in traffic and thus make some use of all the domains i registered to preempt my competition from acquiring good domains. i'm not going to SEO any of these extra domains, as that could eventually amount to SE spam.

    as for the advantage(s) of using my own funnel as opposed to godaddy's (so far not working) 301, i created a thread on it over a week ago, but it got no love:

    http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=530645

  11. #11
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    That's pretty much what I thought was going on - what I meant by my original post is that there isn't any SEO benefit to 301ing parked domains to your site, unless you're going to build links to the parked domain, which would seem a slightly odd thing to do.
    i understand where you are coming from. on godaddy, you can only forward domains that are parked. given, once you "forward" them they are no longer "parked", but that's what godaddy calls them anyways.

  12. #12
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    OK I read Bruce Clay's decription of IP funnels, and basically I disagree with the guy. The main point of it in his eyes is to avoid penalties associated with having many domains point to the same page. This, however, can't lead to penalties, or your competitors would just buy up domains and forward them to your site.
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  13. #13
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lurke skywalker View Post
    while this aspect of my question isnt strictly SEO, this forum is the most appropriate place for this topic IMHO. what i am mainly looking for is to catch type in traffic and thus make some use of all the domains i registered to preempt my competition from acquiring good domains. i'm not going to SEO any of these extra domains, as that could eventually amount to SE spam.
    If you are redirecting new domains with zero links then there won't be any SEO advantage of doing a 301 vs a 302.

  14. #14
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by aaronjj View Post
    If you are redirecting new domains with zero links then there won't be any SEO advantage of doing a 301 vs a 302.
    until your competitor puts up a couple links to your 302'ed domain. it isnt about advantage, it's a defensive measure.

  15. #15
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    OK I read Bruce Clay's decription of IP funnels, and basically I disagree with the guy. The main point of it in his eyes is to avoid penalties associated with having many domains point to the same page. This, however, can't lead to penalties, or your competitors would just buy up domains and forward them to your site.
    have you heard of the "duplicate content penalty"? i suggest you ask big G about that too. if the A record resolves directly to your site you will have a problem.

    while it is possible that your competitors could buy up domains and point to your site to harm you, you can use an htaccess directive (or IIS setting) to reflect that domain away from your site.

    BTW, that "guy" Bruce Clay you refer to is one of the most respected "guys" in the SEO professionals world.

  16. #16
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lurke skywalker View Post
    until your competitor puts up a couple links to your 302'ed domain. it isnt about advantage, it's a defensive measure.
    That will have no effect on the domain the 302 is redirecting to.

  17. #17
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Well that "guy" is wrong. I don't care what his reputation is.
    Google have publicly stated that there is no such thing as a duplicate content penalty as such - i.e. they will determine the original version of the page, which, if you have put any SEO effort in will be your main domain, and stick any copies in the supplemental index. With no detrimental effect on the original content. As you aren't aiming to get the forwarded domains ranked, then the fact that they go in the supplemental index is inconsequential.

    until your competitor puts up a couple links to your 302'ed domain. it isnt about advantage, it's a defensive measure.
    OK, so why can't your competitor buy a domain, 302 it to your site, then link to it? They could, and as such, there can be no penalties associated with it. There is nothing your competitors can do to hurt you SEOwise, aside from if they can get content onto your site via UGC, so there is no need to worry about "defensive" efforts.
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  18. #18
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by aaronjj View Post
    That will have no effect on the domain the 302 is redirecting to.
    then put up 100 domains 302ing to your main one and watch what happens...

  19. #19
    SitePoint Addict
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lurke skywalker View Post
    then put up 100 domains 302ing to your main one and watch what happens...
    I'd be glad to if you can front me the money to register them . I know it would not make one bit of difference to my rankings.

    You're reading a little too much into the hocus-pocus SEO talk. If 302'ing 100 domains would have a negative effect in the SERPS then it would have been exploited a long time ago to take out competitors.

  20. #20
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    Well that "guy" is wrong. I don't care what his reputation is.
    Google have publicly stated that there is no such thing as a duplicate content penalty as such - i.e. they will determine the original version of the page, which, if you have put any SEO effort in will be your main domain, and stick any copies in the supplemental index. With no detrimental effect on the original content. As you aren't aiming to get the forwarded domains ranked, then the fact that they go in the supplemental index is inconsequential.
    what matt cutts says what and google actually does isnt always 100% congruent. given google is getting better at doing what he says they ought to be doing, and maybe a couple years from now i won't have to worry about it. but for now i'd rather be on the safe side. some clients would go bankrupt if they were dropped from the index for a month.


    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    OK, so why can't your competitor buy a domain, 302 it to your site, then link to it? They could, and as such, there can be no penalties associated with it. There is nothing your competitors can do to hurt you SEOwise, aside from if they can get content onto your site via UGC, so there is no need to worry about "defensive" efforts.
    as i said, they CAN do so, although google is getting better at penalizing the proper party. if you had a webmasterworld.com subscription you'd be able to read all about it there. you'd also be able to read dozens of respected members of the SEO community referring to 302s as something to avoid.

    here is a short version:
    http://clsc.net/research/google-302-page-hijack.htm

  21. #21
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by aaronjj View Post
    I'd be glad to if you can front me the money to register them . I know it would not make one bit of difference to my rankings.

    You're reading a little too much into the hocus-pocus SEO talk. If 302'ing 100 domains would have a negative effect in the SERPS then it would have been exploited a long time ago to take out competitors.
    i've had sites dropped from the index because they were being 302'ed to instead of 301. by the way, it has been exploited, it's called a 302 hijack. dunno where to find a high level discussion about the issue other than webmasterworld.com. dunno if i can find any current examples either, since google is not much better at detecting the problem after there was such a big ruckus about it a couple years ago.

  22. #22
    SitePoint Wizard bronze trophy bigalreturns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,295
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by lurke skywalker View Post
    what matt cutts says what and google actually does isnt always 100% congruent. given google is getting better at doing what he says they ought to be doing, and maybe a couple years from now i won't have to worry about it. but for now i'd rather be on the safe side. some clients would go bankrupt if they were dropped from the index for a month.
    I think it was on the Official Google Blog actually, but it doesn't matter. What you have to ask yourself is why would Google lie? If they have identified an issue, and consider it enough of an issue to release official comment about, then surely they would fix whatever the problem is? I'm pretty certain they're capable of doing it, what with the hundreds of PhDs they have working for them and all.
    And seriously, if you have clients that would go bankrupt if they were dropped for one month, you need to get them to look at their business model!

    Quote Originally Posted by lurke skywalker View Post
    as i said, they CAN do so, although google is getting better at penalizing the proper party. if you had a webmasterworld.com subscription you'd be able to read all about it there. you'd also be able to read dozens of respected members of the SEO community referring to 302s as something to avoid.

    here is a short version:
    http://clsc.net/research/google-302-page-hijack.htm
    Google are no fools - they know SEO is a competitive industry, and there are plenty of people willing to go out of their way to hurt their competitors, if it were possible. Google are in the business of serving the most relevant results, ergo they will have eliminated any factors that could be influenced by a competitor from their algorithm. It's just basic common sense.
    From the page you linked me to:
    2006-09-18: Status: It does not seem like this is a widespread problem with Google any more. Yahoo has no problems with this. MSN status is unclear.
    That was nearly 18 months ago...
    And don't listen to any of the crap that gets bandied around on WMW - their general forum population is disgruntled webmasters looking for a reason why poor rankings aren't their fault.
    "The proper function of man is to live - not to exist."
    Get a Free TomTom


  23. #23
    He's No Good To Me Dead silver trophybronze trophy stymiee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Slave I
    Posts
    23,424
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    I'll chime in and keep it short as much of what I want to say is already been pointed out I just want to validate it now.

    1) 301/302 redirects of unused domains have no real SEO value. Doing a massive link campaign for those domain is an incredible waste of time. Focus on the primary website.

    2) Having multiple domains point to oner website without a redirect will not cause any sort of penalties. Otherwise competitors can hurt you just by pointing domains to your website. A general rule of thumb in SEO is this: if a competitor can use it to hurt your site it will not result in a penalty but simply will be ignored or devalued.

    3) Duplicate content filtering is not a penalty. What Google does is simply remove duplicate content and leave the source they consider to be the primary source. The reason why it is smart to do a 301/302 redirect with extra domains instead of just blindly pointing them to one website is you run the risk of having your content divided up amongst the domains in Google's eyes. That hurts your site SEO-wise. But it is not a penalty.

    4) Matt Cutts has never been proven even slightly wrong in any information he has published. If anyone thinks he gives inaccurate information please provide proof before claiming he doesn't give us accurate information. I don't know about anyone else but I like having someone who actually affects Google's search algorithm telling me how Google works. It is not going get any better then that.

    5) That 302 hijack exploit is old news. No one should be concerned about that anymore. 18 months is ancient in Internet time.

    6) Bruce Clay is wrong in his view of IP tunneling. He may be famous, but in SEO lots of famous people have no clue what they are talking about. That can be proven over and over again. (It should be pointed out that this forum has been proven right over and over again).

  24. #24
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    1) 301/302 redirects of unused domains have no real SEO value. Doing a massive link campaign for those domain is an incredible waste of time. Focus on the primary website.
    of course, thats why i said i'm doing this solely to gain some type in traffic and make use of the domains i bought to preempt competitors.

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    2) Having multiple domains point to oner website without a redirect will not cause any sort of penalties. Otherwise competitors can hurt you just by pointing domains to your website. A general rule of thumb in SEO is this: if a competitor can use it to hurt your site it will not result in a penalty but simply will be ignored or devalued.
    302 hijack, the now outdated example, was an exception to that rule.

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    3) Duplicate content filtering is not a penalty. What Google does is simply remove duplicate content and leave the source they consider to be the primary source. The reason why it is smart to do a 301/302 redirect with extra domains instead of just blindly pointing them to one website is you run the risk of having your content divided up amongst the domains in Google's eyes. That hurts your site SEO-wise. But it is not a penalty.
    sure, we have a semantic difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    4) Matt Cutts has never been proven even slightly wrong in any information he has published. If anyone thinks he gives inaccurate information please provide proof before claiming he doesn't give us accurate information. I don't know about anyone else but I like having someone who actually affects Google's search algorithm telling me how Google works. It is not going get any better then that.
    i didnt say he meant to lie or mislead. sometimes he writes about how google OUGHT to perform while knowing that their algo doesnt YET perform as it should 100% of the time. does it eventually get there? i can't think of any instance where it didnt.

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    5) That 302 hijack exploit is old news. No one should be concerned about that anymore. 18 months is ancient in Internet time.
    true, and as i've mentioned already i'm just trying to be safer than sorrier. instead of taking one person's word that the problem is gone i take 5 minutes to setup an IP tunnel. it's less time than it takes to research if the issue still affects anyone in anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by stymiee View Post
    6) Bruce Clay is wrong in his view of IP tunneling. He may be famous, but in SEO lots of famous people have no clue what they are talking about. That can be proven over and over again. (It should be pointed out that this forum has been proven right over and over again).
    did you mean to say his advice is outdated, as in no longer needed, or are you saying he is plain wrong?

    lastly, sitepoint is a wonderful forum, but as far as SEO is concerned, the *average level of discussion* on webmasterworld is MUCH higher than the level here. additionally, the fact that googleguy is a member of that community (and not this one) also says something.

    Quote Originally Posted by bigalreturns View Post
    And don't listen to any of the crap that gets bandied around on WMW - their general forum population is disgruntled webmasters looking for a reason why poor rankings aren't their fault.
    please don't bash WMW, no one there is bashing SP. it's counterproductive and this whole discussion on who is better is irrelevant to this forum's topic.

  25. #25
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    39
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    to shed some light on the original point of this thread: it has been over 24 hours since i re assured myself that i had chosen the 301 option, but i'm still getting a 302. my conclusion at this point is that GoDaddy's redirect, even when you select 301, is actually a 302.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •