Do search engines treat 307 redirects differently from 302 redirects?
-
We will need to send our users to an alternate version of our homepage for a few hours for a certain event. The SEO task at hand is to minimize the chance of the special homepage getting crawled and cached in the search engines in place of our normal homepage. (This has happened in the past so the concern is not imaginary.)
Among other options, 302 and 307 redirects are being discussed. IE, redirecting www.domain.com to www.domain.com/specialpage.
Having used 302s and 301s in the past, I am well aware of how search engines treat them. A 302 effectively says "Hey, Google! Please get rid of the old content on www.domain.com and replace it with the content on /specialpage!" Which is exactly what we don't want.
My question is: do the search engines handle 307s any differently? I am hearing that the 307 does NOT result in the content of the second page being cached with the first URL. But I don't see that in the definition below (from w3.org). Then again, why differentiate it from the 302?
307 Temporary Redirect
The requested resource resides temporarily under a different URI. Since the redirection MAY be altered on occasion, the client SHOULD continue to use the Request-URI for future requests. This response is only cacheable if indicated by a Cache-Control or Expires header field.
The temporary URI SHOULD be given by the Location field in the response. Unless the request method was HEAD, the entity of the response SHOULD contain a short hypertext note with a hyperlink to the new URI(s) , since many pre-HTTP/1.1 user agents do not understand the 307 status. Therefore, the note SHOULD contain the information necessary for a user to repeat the original request on the new URI.
If the 307 status code is received in response to a request other than GET or HEAD, the user agent MUST NOT automatically redirect the request unless it can be confirmed by the user, since this might change the conditions under which the request was issued.
-
Yes, but technically (and according to Google's docs) when you robots something out, you are saying "This URL shouldn't be indexed." And if the special page a)lives at the HP URL, or b) is redirected from the HP via 302, you are telling them "please don't index my homepage." The docs say "when we see noindex, we pull the page."
My question really is whether the 307 is any better than the 302. I think I implied above that I saw no difference but with the "only cacheable if" language It looks like it's supposed to be. THEN AGAIN, that same language is in the HTTP1.1 definition of the 302 as well as a 307.
Bbut I'm hoping someone has an example of using one successfully (where success = the temporary content did not get cached in SERPs).
Thanks!
-
So I just want to make sure I understand what you are looking for here...You want to make a temp redirect to a new homepage that will, realistically, only exist for a little while, few hours tops, and you don't want it indexed. I am imagining that this new HP is going to live on the same domain?
If so why don't you do a 302/JS/Meta Redirect to the new HP and then also adjust the robots.txt file to disallow that from being indexed and to be SUPER SAFE you could rel=canonical the new page to the old page.
Does that help?
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 search pages be indexed?
Hey guys, I've always believed that search pages should be no-indexed but now I'm wondering if there is an argument to index them? Appreciate any thoughts!
Technical SEO | | RebekahVP0 -
Bulk redirection of blogs
Hi all, we're going to changing the url structure of our website. Moving from: /news-and-views/blog/thisistheblogpost to /blog/thisistheblogpost (ie removing the /news-and-views/ portion of the url). There's approximately 300 posts. I have 2 questions - will this have an impact on domain wide authority? and is bulk 301 redirects the best solution? The blogs themselves don't get a huge amount of traffic but we just want to make sure we don't do something that will be penalized by search engines.
Technical SEO | | francisclark2 -
Should you change Temporary redirects 302's to a 301 even if page is not important/intended for ranking ?
Hi Whilst i appreciate its best practice to 301 redirect permanently moved pages, what if the page is say a login page or other page you not really interested in ranking or transferring juice to ? is it still important/best practice to do so simply because the page has permanently moved hence should still be a 301 even though you don't really want it to rank ? cheers dan
Technical SEO | | Dan-Lawrence1 -
Help with 301 redirect code
Hi, I can't work out how to make this one work and would apreciate if someone could help.
Technical SEO | | Paul_MC
i have a series of folders from a old site that are in the structure:
/c/123456/bags.html (the "123456" changes and is any series of 6 digit numbers), and the "bags.html" changes depending on the product.
I need that to be 301 redirected to the following format:
/default/bags/bags.html0 -
Redirecting 404
Hi. I'm working on a wordpress site, which got some old deleted pages indexed and now shows a 404 (also in the results) As these old pages earlier got content and probably also some links pointing towards it, what would then be best practice to do? Should i make an 301 redirect? Make the 404 noindex?
Technical SEO | | Mickelp0 -
Different links to to the same page
Hi, Based on the user's actions we post activity into users Facebook timeline. And each activity has link back to our particular page on our website. For example if original page was: www.Domain.com from Facebook timeline it would be like this: www.Domain.com?Ffb_action_ids=101508953168 Do you think this will have a negative effect on our page rankings as we will eded up having a lot of different URL's to the same page? www.Domain.com?Ffb_action_ids=101508953168 www.Domain.com?Ffb_action_ids=456788765609 etc.. Thank you, Karen Bdoyan
Technical SEO | | showme0 -
Different pages first results on same keyword search
Hi, Sometimes Google does not show the page you intended for a certain keyword. Logically you would say that the intended page is not relevant/strong enough. But in my case several pages ranked fine for a long period of time and all of a sudden another less important page gets the highest result on a keyword search. (We are in the camping business) For instance: One of our campsites called Tenuta primero used to rank position 9 in google with page below for a long time (search: 'camping tenuta primero') This was the page we intended to rank with. http://www.suncamp.nl/nl/nl/campings/italie/friuli-venezia-giulia/camping-tenuta-primero/uc19-l1-n797-c13-r115-cp104959/ Now all of a sudden the position for search 'camping tenuta primero' is position 33 with review page below. http://www.suncamp.nl/nl/nl/campings/italie/friuli-venezia-giulia/camping-tenuta-primero/beoordelingen/uc19-l1-n797-c13-r115-cp104959-t22598/ What could have caused this? Pages are in Dutch but main keywords are camping are tenuta primero. Thank you very much in advance! Kind regards, Dennis Overbeek Dennis@acsi.eu | www.suncamp.nl |
Technical SEO | | SEO_ACSI0