Server requests: 302 followed by a 200
-
Hi,
On an IIS system clicking a particular link the following response codes are returned:
GET /nl/nl/process?Someparameter1=1&Someparameter2=2
302 found
GET /nl/nl/SomeOtherPage.cms
200 OK
What concerns me, besides the obvious 302 and the cAmeLcAse canonical issues is the 200 response without a redirect.
What page will then be indexed, ranked and what effect does this have on the pagerank flow, if the 302 was to be changed into a 301?
Also would extention .cms be an issue?Thanks for any answers.
Edit. I contacted the developer. He says it's a rewrite, not a meta redirect.
I still think, this rewrite is an issue? Canonical maybe? -
So why is the rewrite not an issue?
Google sees the GET /nl/nl/process?Someparameter1=1&Someparameter2=2, never mind the 302 (which is a very obvious issue).
Then it sees the GET /nl/nl/SomeOtherPage.cms
To Googlebot it might as well be a meta redirect, which is an issue, as this will not pass pagerank. Server response is not different from a meta redirect....Or should I interprete the last GET in some other way?
I agree on the .cms
-
The rewrite is not an issue but you should change from 302 to 301 in order to pass the link equity to the new page.
As for the page name format, cms extension is not an issue from google's point of view. However from a user point of view that is not really friendly (not only the extension but the name in general). Since you can re-write the name as you want I would consider changing those into a more friendly look.
Hope it helps.
-
IIS loves 302s... Ask your developer to change the 302 to a 301 instead.
The indexed page will then be "/nl/nl/SomeOtherPage.cms" and the "link juice" will flow to it.
Also stick with lowercase in the urls.
The .cms extension is not an issue imo.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Should we no-follow it or no?
We run the biggest yellow pages in Lithuania, and lately we have allowed companies to put their facebook' links on the info page. You can see the facebook button on the left: http://www.visalietuva.lt/imone/fcr-media-lietuva-uab We put the no-follow attribute for now. Should we do that or just leave it as follow and expect that Google will count this as "trustworthy" link? I hope I made it pretty clear 🙂 Thank you very much.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | FCRMediaLietuva0 -
Ecommerce - Go to Basket 302 query
Hi I have done a site crawl and there are a lot of 302's on the 'Go to Basket' link when customers go through to pay. Should these be updated to 301's? On just the first part of the link so nothing after the ? /OrderCalculation? Thank you
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BeckyKey0 -
Best strategy to follow for a single service site
Can anyone share what they feel is the best strategy to follow for a single service site? Would you optimise and target the homepage for the primary service they offer or target a page one level lower and leave the homepage to target the Brand name? Links to any references or case studies would also be greatly appreciated, thank you!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Marketing_Today0 -
Should I set up no index no follow on low quality pages?
I know it is a good idea for duplicate pages, blog tags, etc. but I remember somewhere that you can help the overall link juice of a website by adding no index no follow or no index follow low quality content pages of your website. Is it still a good idea to do this or was it never a good idea to begin with? Michael
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Michael_Rock0 -
Why would our server return a 301 status code when Googlebot visits from one IP, but a 200 from a different IP?
I have begun a daily process of analyzing a site's Web server log files and have noticed something that seems odd. There are several IP addresses from which Googlebot crawls that our server returns a 301 status code for every request, consistently, day after day. In nearly all cases, these are not URLs that should 301. When Googlebot visits from other IP addresses, the exact same pages are returned with a 200 status code. Is this normal? If so, why? If not, why not? I am concerned that our server returning an inaccurate status code is interfering with the site being effectively crawled as quickly and as often as it might be if this weren't happening. Thanks guys!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | danatanseo0 -
Crawl Budget on Noindex Follow
We have a list of crawled product search pages where pagination on Page 1 is indexed and crawled and page 2 and onward is noindex, noarchive follow as we want the links followed to the Product Pages themselves. (All product Pages have canonicals and unique URLs) Orr search results will be increasing the sets, and thus Google will have more links to follow on our wesbite although they all will be noindex pages. will this impact our carwl budget and additionally have impact to our rankings? Page 1 - Crawled Indexed and Followed Page 2 onward - Crawled No-index No-Archive Followed Thoughts? Thanks, Phil G
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | AU-SEO0 -
No index, follow vs. canonical url
We have a site that consists almost entirely as a directory of videos. Example here: http://realtree.tv/channels/realtreeoutdoorsclassics We're trying to figure out the best way to handle pagination and utility features such as sort for most recent, most viewed, etc. We've been reading countless articles on this topic, but so far have been unable to determine what might be considered the industry standard. Two solutions seem to stand out... Using the canonical url on all the sorted and paginated pages. However, after reading many blog posts, it seems that you should NEVER use the canonical url to solve the issue of paginated, and thus duplicated content because the search bots will never crawl past the first page leaving many results not in the index. (We are considering ruling this method out.) Another solution seems to be using the meta tag for noindex, follow so that a search engine like Google will crawl your directory pages but not add them to the index themselves. All links are followed so content is crawled and any passing link juice remains unchanged. However, I did see a few articles skeptical of this solution as well saying that there are always better alternatives, or that there is no verification that search engines obey this meta tag. This has placed some doubt in our minds. I was hoping to get some expert advice on these methods as it would pertain to our site. Thank you.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | grayloon0 -
How long is it safe to use a 302 redirect?
Hi All, Lets assume there is site A and site B, both sites are live on the internet today as standalone businesses, but they sell very similar products. Site B has built up some link equity and will eventually become the domain for site A due to an organisational re-brand. For the time being however site A will remain, but site B needs to disappear temporarily, but not lose the link equity which has been built up against it. My current thinking is to 302 redirect site B to site A such that users and search bots accessing site B will be redirected to site A whilst leaving the link equity that exists against site B fully intact and allowing us to continue to grow it should we wish to. The question is, does anybody have a view on how long it is safe to use a 302 temporary redirect for? i.e., is 8-10 months to long. Thanks, Ben
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BenRush0