Comments on: The anatomy of a server sided redirect: 301, 302 and 307 illuminated SEO wise http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/ If you've read my articles somewhere on the Internet, expect something different here. Wed, 23 May 2012 06:27:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.3 By: How To 301 Redirect A Website http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2969 How To 301 Redirect A Website Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:10:27 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2969 [...] ever need to use 303. (If you’re still interested in the differences, here’s a great status code pamphlet by [...] […] ever need to use 303. (If you’re still interested in the differences, here’s a great status code pamphlet by […]

]]> By: Stan Bongers http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2958 Stan Bongers Sun, 30 Oct 2011 08:15:17 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2958 I never thought twice about using a 301 redirect before but now I understand the implications of doing so in a way I never did before. I will have to think twice in the future about using a site with a high page rank as just a vehicle for a redirect I never thought twice about using a 301 redirect before but now I understand the implications of doing so in a way I never did before. I will have to think twice in the future about using a site with a high page rank as just a vehicle for a redirect

]]> By: John http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2747 John Mon, 06 Dec 2010 06:47:56 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2747 I'm still not sure whot is optimal for maintenance temporary redirect. 307 or 302 ...? [During maintenance windows serve a 503, don't redirect! Sebastian] I’m still not sure whot is optimal for maintenance temporary redirect. 307 or 302 …?

[During maintenance windows serve a 503, don’t redirect! Sebastian]

]]> By: Sebastian http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2649 Sebastian Mon, 15 Nov 2010 15:35:00 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2649 Mike, if this 'move' makes sense at all, then make sure that the new example.com content doesn't share URIs with the old stuff that will be served from greatexample.com. On each and every Web object currently living off example.com provide a rel-canonical meta element pointing to its corresponding URI at greatexample.com. Unfortunately, you can't do that with non-HTML objects yet, so those should perform a 307 redirect pointing to their new greatexample.com URI (until the engines support <a href="http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/x-canonical-uri-http-header/">LINK headers</a>). When the new example.com content is ready to launch, 301-redirect the old stuff (HTML pages as well as all other objects) to corresponding URIs at greatexample.com. As long as example.com lives, do not reuse old URIs. That doesn't work for all URIs. As for the root index page, example.com/ should have a hint like "if you're searching for ancient stuff no longer available here, try greatexample.com" or so. Mike, if this ‘move’ makes sense at all, then make sure that the new example.com content doesn’t share URIs with the old stuff that will be served from greatexample.com.

On each and every Web object currently living off example.com provide a rel-canonical meta element pointing to its corresponding URI at greatexample.com. Unfortunately, you can’t do that with non-HTML objects yet, so those should perform a 307 redirect pointing to their new greatexample.com URI (until the engines support LINK headers).

When the new example.com content is ready to launch, 301-redirect the old stuff (HTML pages as well as all other objects) to corresponding URIs at greatexample.com. As long as example.com lives, do not reuse old URIs.

That doesn’t work for all URIs. As for the root index page, example.com/ should have a hint like “if you’re searching for ancient stuff no longer available here, try greatexample.com” or so.

]]> By: Mike http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2645 Mike Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:19:47 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2645 Sebastian, I know very little about the technology beyond starting my browser and typing in a URL. Will you recommend my best option based on your knowledge? I want to point www.example.com to www.greatexample.com. I will change www.example.com to have content of it's own, but that will not happen for a few months at least. I want www.example.com found (vs. always redirecting to www.greatexample.com) when the content is ready. Should I use a 301, 302, or 307 redirect? I have also heard of "web forwarding", but I don't know which of these four options is best. Thanks! Sebastian,
I know very little about the technology beyond starting my browser and typing in a URL. Will you recommend my best option based on your knowledge?

I want to point www.example.com to www.greatexample.com.

I will change www.example.com to have content of it’s own, but that will not happen for a few months at least.

I want www.example.com found (vs. always redirecting to www.greatexample.com) when the content is ready.

Should I use a 301, 302, or 307 redirect? I have also heard of “web forwarding”, but I don’t know which of these four options is best.

Thanks!

]]> By: SEO Toxin: Directory-like URI Structures | SEO Bullshit http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2250 SEO Toxin: Directory-like URI Structures | SEO Bullshit Tue, 02 Feb 2010 18:24:19 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-2250 [...] server name canonicalization), and search engines won’t index any product page, because five redirects in a row is the maximum. There’s no maximum when it comes to SEO myths, so probably most [...] […] server name canonicalization), and search engines won’t index any product page, because five redirects in a row is the maximum. There’s no maximum when it comes to SEO myths, so probably most […]

]]> By: As if sloppy social media users ain’t bad enough … search engines support traffic theft http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1868 As if sloppy social media users ain’t bad enough … search engines support traffic theft Mon, 26 Oct 2009 19:19:19 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1868 [...] what a mess. The candidate from Redmond fails totally on understanding the HTTP protocol. Their search index is flooded with a bazillion of URI-only listings that all do a 301 redirect, [...] […] what a mess. The candidate from Redmond fails totally on understanding the HTTP protocol. Their search index is flooded with a bazillion of URI-only listings that all do a 301 redirect, […]

]]> By: Jehzeel Laurente http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1844 Jehzeel Laurente Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:07:45 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1844 I still can't understand what's the difference between 302 and 307 redirection. :( [302-found-elsewhere indicates crap. 307-temp-redirect-don't-cache is a cool way to tell the user agent that a resource must get requested under this address but the content will be delivered by another URI at the moment, or from frequently changing URIs ....] I still can’t understand what’s the difference between 302 and 307 redirection. :(

[302-found-elsewhere indicates crap. 307-temp-redirect-don’t-cache is a cool way to tell the user agent that a resource must get requested under this address but the content will be delivered by another URI at the moment, or from frequently changing URIs ….]

]]> By: Nick http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1789 Nick Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:40:50 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1789 Good meaty article. It cleared up some points for me, so thanks for that. BTW, I've been using 310's for a while. Apparently, these are even more permanent than 301's. [<a href="http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec10.html#sec10.3">Wow</a>. There's no such thing as a "310" alias for 410-your-spammy-link-status-is-Gone.] Good meaty article. It cleared up some points for me, so thanks for that. BTW, I’ve been using 310’s for a while. Apparently, these are even more permanent than 301’s.

[Wow. There’s no such thing as a “310″ alias for 410-your-spammy-link-status-is-Gone.]

]]> By: Przekierowania HTTP | TeMPOraL's devBlog http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1771 Przekierowania HTTP | TeMPOraL's devBlog Tue, 08 Sep 2009 05:50:08 +0000 http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/the-anatomy-of-http-redirects-301-302-307/#comment-1771 [...] jedno z nich powinno być powszechnie znane programistom PHP. Wpis ten oparty jest o post "The anatomy of server sided redirect" na blogu Sebastian's Pamphlets, specyfikacji HTTP/1.1, której wydrukowany fragment trzymam obok [...] […] jedno z nich powinno być powszechnie znane programistom PHP. Wpis ten oparty jest o post “The anatomy of server sided redirect” na blogu Sebastian’s Pamphlets, specyfikacji HTTP/1.1, której wydrukowany fragment trzymam obok […]

]]>