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
-
Manual Penalty Reconsideration Request Help
Hi All, I'm currently in the process of creating a reconsideration request for an 'Impact Links' manual penalty. So far I have downloaded all LIVE backlinks from multiple sources and audited them into groups; Domains that I'm keeping (good quality, natural links). Domains that I'm changing to No Follow (relevant good quality links that are good for the user but may be affiliated with my company, therefore changing the links to no follow rather than removing). Domains that I'm getting rid of. (poor quality sites with optimised anchor text, directories, articles sites etc.). One of my next steps is to review every historical back link to my website that is NO LONGER LIVE. To be thorough, I have planned to go through every domain (even if its no longer linking to my site) that has previously linked and straight up disavow the domain (if its poor quality).But I want to first check whether this is completely necessary for a successful reconsideration request? My concerns are that its extremely time consuming (as I'm going through the domains to avoid disavowing a good quality domain that might link back to me in future and also because the historical list is the largest list of them all!) and there is also some risk involved as some good domains might get caught in the disavowing crossfire, therefore I only really want to carry this out if its completely necessary for the success of the reconsideration request. Obviously I understand that reconsideration requests are meant to be time consuming as I'm repenting against previous SEO sin (and believe me I've already spent weeks getting to the stage I'm at right now)... But as an in house Digital Marketer with many other digital avenues to look after for my company too, I can't justify spending such a long time on something if its not 100% necessary. So overall - with a manual penalty request, would you bother sifting through domains that either don't exist anymore or no longer link to your site and disavow them for a thorough reconsideration request? Is this a necessary requirement to revoke the penalty or is Google only interested in links that are currently or recently live? All responses, thoughts and ideas are appreciated 🙂 Kind Regards Sam
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Sandicliffe0 -
Unnatural Links Warning, but nowhere to submit a reconsideration request.
More than a year ago (August 2013) I got an "Unnatural Links Warning," I ignored it because I thought it was erroneously sent and that it was odd that there was no place for me to submit a reconsideration request in the Manual Actions section of Webmaster Tools. This happened for several of my domains. I am now noticing a lost in ranking (but not a loss in "ability" to rank). It led me to post this question in the Webmaster Help Forum, I really didn't get an answer though. Here is a link to the Google Export of my links from zachrussell.net and protechig.com. Any idea of what I can do related to this? Even If I did disavow/remove any questionable links, there is no place for me to submit a reconsideration request.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Zachary_Russell0 -
For URLs that require login, should our redirect be 301 or 302?
We have a login required section of our website that is being crawled and reporting as potential issues in Webmaster Tools. I'm not sure what the best solution to this is - is it to make URLs requiring a login noindex/nocrawl? Right now, we have them 302 redirecting to the login page, since it's a temporary redirect, it seems like it isn't the right solution. Is a 301 better?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | alecfwilson0 -
How to do a site migration followed by a domain migration and avoid 301 redirect chains?
Hi all, The current roadmap for our Eng team has us performing a site migration (redirecting one subfolder to another subfolder) and then a domain migration shortly after. The way I see it, I have 2 scenarios (the 1st involves the site migration THEN the domain migration and the 2nd is the site migration and domain migration being done simultaneously): olddomain.com/subfolder-old to olddomain.com/subfolder-new THEN olddomain.com/subfolder-new to newdomain.com/subfolder-new AND olddomain.com/subfolder-old to newdomain.com/subfolder-new olddomain.com/subfolder-old to newdomain.com/subfolder-new I also understand that there are two best practices for a domain migration and they are 1) keep everything the same that you can to help Google understand it is the same page, just on a different domain and 2) avoid chain redirects. As you can imagine, scenario 1 requires more Eng costs than scenario 2. So, my question is, is scenario 2 a perfectly viable option or should I make the push to go for scenario 1? Any advice is greatly appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brad-causes1 -
Do you have to wait after disavowing before submitting a reconsideration request
Hi all We have a link penalty at the moment it seems. I went through 40k links in various phases and have disavowed over a thousand domains that date back to old SEO work. I was barely able to have any links removed as the majority are on directories etc that no one looks after any more etc and / or which are spammy and scraped anyway. According to link research tools link detox tool, we now have a very low risk profile (I loaded the disavowed links into the tool for it to take into consideration when assessing our profile). I then submitted a reconsideration request on the same day as loading the new disavowed file (on the 26th of April). However today (7th May) we got a message in webmaster central that says our link profile is still unnatural. Aaargh. My question: is the disavow file taken into consideration when the reconsideration request is reviewed (ie is that information immediately available to the reviewer)? Or do we have to wait for the disavow file to flow through in the crawl stats? If so, how long do we have to wait? I've checked a link that I disavowed last time and it's still showing up in the links that I pull down from Webmaster Central, and indeed links that I disavowed at the start of April are still showing up in the list of links that can be downloaded. Any help gratefully received. I'm pulling my hair out here, trying to undo the dodgy work of a few random people many months ago! Cheers, Will
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ArenaFlowers.com0 -
Do follow or no follow on wordpress site?
I have read many different opinions on what links to make do follow on a wordpress website versus which ones to leave as no follow. (internal and external) There does not seem to be any consensus among the inputs to date. Any perspectives on this would be appreciated. thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | casper4340 -
Translated site on same server as English version
Hi We are in the process of getting our .com (English) website translated to Chinese. My question is, what are the pitfulls if the site is hosted on the SAME server as the English version. So the server would host both .com and .com.cn versions Thoughts ?? Thanks Neil
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | NeilTompkins0 -
NOINDEX or NOINDEX,FOLLOW
Currently we employ this tag on pages we want to keep out of the index but want link juice to flow through them: <META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX"> Is the tag above the same as: <META NAME="ROBOTS" CONTENT="NOINDEX,FOLLOW"> Or should we be specifying the "FOLLOW" in our tag?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Peter2640
