Link Blocks
-
Sorry, perhaps a noob question.
In relation to site explorer, have also searched and unable to find any information, wondered if anyone could advise as to what "Linking C Blocks" are? Found under the "Compare Link Metrics" tab.
Thanks in advance.
Lee
-
Ok, better now
Well, it seems a good link profile:
you have 240 linking root domain and 192 of them are from different c-blocks and of those 240 root domains 205 are followed.
-
no problem, tbh I struggled a bit writing the question :)) See attached though, much appreciated.
-
I doubt it, there are 254 ips in a c-block, but there is 65,000 in a B and 16,000,000 in a A.
Now considereing that 1 ip number can have thousonds of websites, such as discountASP hosting. the chance of gettiing a link from the same B or A are very high, exspecialy in teh same city.
I believe that the whole c-block thnk is over blown for these reasons
discountASP is a huge hosting company, yet they run all website on one IP number.
You can in theroy have 14 billion ip numbers on your network using nat translations with only one external ip number, using host headers the number is infinate.So while I beleve that SE's take c-blocks into account, i dont think its too much of a problem unless you have a high percentage.
I have this problem because i build and host sites myself. so its of limited use my putting my link on each one, infact it could be harmfull.
I wonder if google takes this in to account, that many like me that develop websites and host them have this problem.
-
On a SEO perspective, right now they do not seems correlated to better rankings. Honestly the best person to answer your question should be Rand himself, as he is surely more expert than me on this "correlation" thing
-
I would not think to blocks as a discriminant in passing more or less link juice, simply I will take them into account as an ever better way for Google to understand if a site is really "popular" or not.
- No links = site totally ignored by the users
- Links but poor unique root domains diversification = poor popularity and maybe spam based links
- Links and great number of unique root domains but por C-Blocks diversification = good popularity, but maybe based on sites's network
- Links and great number of unique root domains and good diversification of C-Block = good popularity and more probably based on natural link building (even though manipulative actions cannot be excluded)
There's then the case of a site that has few links from a not too big unique domains names on different C-Blocks. I saw cases that this kind of sites can compete well against the third case I've listed above.
About your last question, just with your words i cannot understand it well. May you add a snapshot of what are you seeing?
-
What a well presented, excellent answer. Are the A blocks and B blocks ever relevant in a way similar to that of the C block being same host?
Thanks Gianluca
-
Ah, many thanks to you both
would I be right in assuming links from the same C Block would pass less juice or would none be passed?
Also just to clarify, the figure in site explorer shows 192 what is this telling me? Not sure if this is what it is describing but the figure for "Total Linking Root Domains" is 240.
lol sorry, so many questions
-
Gian is pretty much right. Linking C blocks is a useful metric to know. Websites on the same C-block IP address are likely owned by the same person/company and will give less weight.
For best results your linking c-blocks should be as close to your linking root domains as possible. Diversity is the key. Otherwise you could just buy 1000 root domains, host them on the same server space for very little cost and dominate the search results.
-
There's an old great answer to your question in the Search Engine Forum. I copy it here:
A "C" Block address is based on your IP. In general, webhosts are given a different class C, so if you have a different C block, you are usually talking about two different webhosts.
I'm talking about the actual hardware owners here, of course. If two resellers of the same host sell you two hosting accounts, there is a good chance they are both on the same Class C.
Google assumes that sites hosted by two different hosts are probably separate, and therefore links between sites hosted on them are more likely to be from different people. There are problems with that assumption, but it's one of the things they look at anyway (gotta look at something).
Let's say you had an account with a shared IP address. So, for example, you had two sites that both used 192.168.5.1 as an IP. Google would tend to assume that these two sites are related, since they are on the same IP. This can be an issue with free or cheap hosts, which may have thousands of websites hosted on the same shared IP. You would normally try to avoid this if you had multiple sites that were likely to link to each other.
Now let's say that you got yourself 2 different (static) IP - your host would probably give you 192.168.5.2 and 192.168.5.3, in this example. Well these are two different IP's all right, but they are right next to each other, aren't they? Google would also likely consider these to be related.
But what if you hosted with another site across town? Perhaps they would be assigned a group of IP's to hand out that look like 192.168.122.XXX. Well, that 122 now indicates a different ISP, and therefore two sites hosted at this level are more likely to be considered unrelated.
To make a long story short:
192.168.006.001
is a standard, fully qualified IP address. The blocks in this case are:
AAA.BBB.CCC.001-254
That's not a Typo - Class D and E look totally different. The last 3 digits are actually called the Rest Field
So these are within the same class
192.168.222.111
192.168.222.230And these are different Class C IP's:
192.167.111.233
192.168.222.233I quote just part of the post, as part of is related to a specific issue. You can read it here: http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showthread.php?t=14838
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
-
Inbound Links/Spam Score - Disavow
Hi I have been using the Links tool in our Pro account on Moz, using the MOZ spam score/inbound links tool I can identify the linking domains and their spam rating. It shows we currently have around 4.8k linking domains and when I export the data I receive information like below. (Name - Spam Score)
Moz Pro | | mlb7
wall03d3.ga --%
wallieepattern.gq --%
ajij.tk --%
0pattern36.tk --%
70patterndesign.cf --%
discountbuy3cheap2.gq --%
androiddesktop39.ga --%
mobile2android7.ml --%
9321coupon.gq --%
9722.gq --%
blackphoto.us --%
yzbm.info 89%
e411info.info 90%
bcep2015.nl 91%
6vh.info 93% These sites are linking to our images on the site and also to the product the image is from. 80% of our links are like these ones above I understand these types of links are quite common especially for e commerce sites but should I disavow these on a regular basis or ignore them? I don’t want to ignore them if they could harm us. Thanks Mike0 -
Same linking c-blocks trend as competitor
I noticed in our competitive link report that our number of linking c-blocks has risen and fallen in the exact same pattern as one of our competitors. Is there a reason why this would be happening?
Moz Pro | | ZoomInformation0 -
Moz Spam Analysis vs. GWMT Links to Your Site
Hi Moz Community, I have been conducting some link auditing and started comparing the Moz Spam Analysis tool with the links provided in Google WMT. It appears that the Moz Spam Analysis tools shows an aggregate of links that Moz may or may not consider spam, however when you download and look at Google's "Links to Your Site" list it provides every link iteration known to man that's pointing to the target website - without providing any hints as to whether or not a link may be considered spam by Google. The biggest concern I have here is that Google is picking up a lot of links, which I consider spam, that do not appear in the Moz Spam Analysis results. I guess the question(s) I have are: Does it make sense to compare these two data sets? Has anyone else tried this comparison and how did you use the information to make positive changes? Any recommendations when it comes to determining if an external link is spam/hurting/helping a website? Thank you!
Moz Pro | | GoogleDowner0 -
Sometimes we could not download all the data of inbound links from all linking domains
Sometimes we could not download all the data of inbound links from all linking domains. (Around tithe.) Don't you have any idea?
Moz Pro | | crossfinity0 -
DA or PA for link building strenght
Hello, We're doing link building for nlpca(dot)com with Open Site Explorer. 90% of the sites found that we're targeting have NLP resource sections that will probably list our site because we are an authority. My Excel Spreadsheet has the following values: Backlink Holder Site Name Site URL Site Type Tactic PA Ease (1-5) Estimated Value (1-5) Priority (Ease x Est. Value) Contact Info -- I'm only interested in strong sites - sites that will be around for the long haul, and I'm stopping aquiring sites that their resource section has a PA lower than 20. Should I be incorporating DA in some way as well? What other feedback do you have for me?
Moz Pro | | BobGW0 -
BOTW links not recognized by Open Site Explorer
Hi there, I was wondering if I buy a submission to the Best of the Web directory (waiting for the new directory list promised by the seomoz team 🙂 ) but when I get to the category on BOTW website that will fit for my website, I took some links already there and put them on open site explorer to see their value, I had the surprise they are not even recognized... So I am still wondering if it is worth or not... voilà , if anybody knows if this directory still has value...
Moz Pro | | thuraminho750 -
To block with robots.txt or canonicalize?
I'm working with an apt community with a large number of communities across the US. I'm running into dup content issues where each community will have a page such as "amenities" or "community-programs", etc that are nearly identical (if not exactly identical) across all communities. I'm wondering if there are any thoughts on the best way to tackle this. The two scenarios I came up with so far are: Is it better for me to select the community page with the most authority and put a canonical on all other community pages pointing to that authoritative page? or Should i just remove the directory all-together via robots.txt to help keep the site lean and keep low quality content from impacting the site from a panda perspective? Is there an alternative I'm missing?
Moz Pro | | JonClark150