Canonical tag, CNAME and 301 redirect
-
I have a website with a couple of domains pointing to one IP address. Let's say I have two domains www.example.com and www.example.ca
I also see during my SEO analysis that the example.com and the www.example.com (same for the example.ca and the www.example.ca) are triggering server responses.
How do I deal with this issue for best SEO. Canonical links? CNAME, or 301 redirects? thanks
-
Oh yes... it was a mistyping from my part, sorry
-
Gianluca, thanks for your time. Before I ask my web host to do this one point of clarification. In step 2 you mention redirect of example.com to www.example.com Since www.example.ca is my focus should this be example.ca to www.example.ca or is it correct as stated?
-
It always better to do a 301... also because exists also Bing as a search engine, and it does not know what you have done in GWT
-
thanks very much. As suggested above I just went to google webmaster tools and did specify www.example.com and www.example.ca as the preferred domains. Do I still need to do 301 redirects as well or just a redirect from www.example.com to www.example.ca
-
301 all the other versions to the www.example.ca domain.
I mean...
- redirect 301 the .com domain to the .ca domain (this will take care both of sub-domain and root domain)
- redirect 301 example.com to www.example.com via .htaccess
If you don't do it you have a massive duplication issue... being www.example.ca stronger in link building, it is normal that the other (which are dupes) doesn't go well.
-
all four (www.example.com, example.com, www.example.ca and example.ca) have same content. I have focused all of my SEO efforts on the www.example.ca version. It now ranks well and has good authority and PR but I am concerned about the other versions. I though of adding a canonical tag to the header of the pages on the website making the www.example.ca version the canonical version and then doing 301 redirects (Do I redirect the www.example.com to www.example.ca and then redirect the example.ca to the www.example.ca or is there more to this?). I can easily go the cname route with my server host but I had heard that a 301 is better. Does this added info add clarity to what I am asking? thanks very much for your answers and time til now
-
First of all you have to choose what u are going to use www or no-www, then stick to this! I suggest the www version as most of the people use this when typing in urls directly in their browser.
Then go to your Google Webmaster Tools and set your preferred domain to your choice.
Last but not least make sure you have a redirect for the traffic that does use url without www... You can do this with an .htaccess file. This is a small text file that can handle your redirects.
I don't quite understand the other part, do all the domains share the same content? If so, you should use those canonical tags to indicate where the original content comes from...
-
Delete this for double posting (sorry)
-
In fact that's the way to have just the sub-domain www. appearing online.
And, sorry, I don't really understand the .ca e .com question... does those domains show the same content. In that case one of the two (.com if you target public worldwide or .ca if you target only Canada) should be redirected 301 to the other.
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
-
Reusing an already 301 redirected URL for a very important keyword
I have a question about reusing an already 301 redirected URL Till now I never reused an URLs that has been already redirected with a 301 redirect. However, I just started working on a website where in past they created a lot of 301 redirects without thinking about the future, and now certain URLs, that are currently redirected with a 301, would be very useful (exact match) and needed (for some of the most important keywords for this specific business), to maintain an optimal, homogeneous and "beautiful" URL structure. Has any of you ever reused a URL that was previously redirected with a 301 redirect? If yes what are your experiences with it? Can content on the reused URL (that was previously 301 redirected and than the redirect removed) normally rank if the page is reestablished and the redirect is removed (and you do great content, on page, internal linking, backlinking, .... ) or is such an URL risky / not recommended / "burned" forever and not recommended to be reused again... especially for very important keywords since it present the exact match ?! Thank you very much for all your help! Regards
Technical SEO | | moz46y0 -
Is anyone able to check this 301 redirect for errors please?
Hi, I had a developer write a 301 wildcard for redirecting old hosted site to a new domain. Old URLS looked like /b/2039566/1/akai.html
Technical SEO | | Paul_MC
With varying letters & numbers. I have 26,000 crawl errors in GWT and I can only imagine it's because this is looping?
Can anyone advise if this would be causing grief? Thanks
Paul RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^vacuumdirect.com.au$ [OR]
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www.vacuumdirect.com.au$
RewriteRule ^/?$ "http://www.vacuumbag.net.au/vacuum-cleaners.html" [R=301,L] <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^p/([0-9]+)/(.*) default/$2 [R=301,L]</ifmodule> <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^c/([0-9]+)/1/(.*) default/vacuum-bags/vacuum-cleaner-bags-$2 [R=301,L]</ifmodule> <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^p/([0-9]+)/(.*) $2 [R=301,L]</ifmodule> <ifmodule mod_rewrite.c="">RewriteEngine On
RewriteBase /
RewriteRule ^c/([0-9]+)/(.*) default/$2 [R=301,L]</ifmodule>0 -
What is the difference between 301 redirect to 404 vs just 404.
A bunch of pages on my site are set to 301 redirect to our 404 page. Intuitively, I feel like they should all just 404 from the page's url and not redirect to the 404 page. How do I explain to my developer that they should not redirects but should just 404? Is there much of a difference between the redirect first vs 404 first? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | gaytravel0 -
Does it really matter to set 301 redirect for not found error pages?
I've very simple question for not found error pages. Does it really require to set up 301 redirect for all not found error pages which detected in Google webmaster tools? Honestly, I don't want to set 301 redirect exclude externally connected pages. So, what will impact on ranking after follow this process?
Technical SEO | | CommercePundit0 -
Do 301 redirects now allow most of the bad value to pass through?
I heard after the 3.2 update that most of your bad history passes though the 301 redirect.. What do you guys think out there?
Technical SEO | | Merta19801 -
Redirect or not to redirect
We are rebuilding a website and try to get rid of errors. The content remains exactly the same but we correct the code and make it load faster. The site has quite many backlinks and I can't decide whether to remove .html endings from the urls and 301 redirect to the new ones or leave them with the older ending. If I remove the endings how much of the link juice will be passed? Anyone any idea?
Technical SEO | | sesertin0 -
How similar do pages need to be in order to utilize the canonical tag
Here is my specific situation. My company released new versions of a few documents in the fall. I was hoping that over time the old version would decline and the new version would rise but after 6 months the old version continues to rank #1 and the new version #3. The old version needs to stay on our site but users should really be getting to the most recent version. I think utilizing the canonical tag would solve the issue but i am concerned because the content on the actual pages is not duplicate but it is updated. Below are the two URLs to see the differences in the content. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/06tr008.cfm http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/10tr033.cfm Is this an appropriate situation to use the canonical tag? If not, is there a better solution.
Technical SEO | | SEI0 -
On Page 301 redirect for html pages
For php pages youve got Header( "HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently" );
Technical SEO | | shupester
Header( "Location: http://www.example.com" );
?> Is there anything for html pages? Other then Or is placing this code redirect 301 /old/old.htm http://www.you.com/new.php in the .htaccess the only way to properly 301 redirect html pages? Thanks!0