Http:// to https:// 301 or 302 redirect
-
I've read over the Q & A in the Community, but am wondering the reasoning behind this issue.
I know - 301's are permanent and pass links, and 302s are temporary (due to cache) and don't pass links. But, I've run across two sites now that 302 redirect http:// to https://.
Is there a valid reason behind this? From my POV and research, the redirect should 301 if it's permanent, but is there a larger issue I am missing?
-
Our IT guys do the same with our sites and they have no good reason for doing it.
-
301 permanent redirect. Its the best solution and google too likes it.
hope it helps
-
I am not sure what big IT gurus think before they add 302 over 301 but if you ask me I have a simple rule that I apply before deciding which redirection to use.
- Obviously there is no hard and fast rule that you should use 301 over 302 redirections.
- Always keep it simple, you need to flow the link juice to the next page, go for 301 and if you don’t go with 301.
Hope this helps!
-
Thanks for that article. I've always thought it to be a hard and fast rule that 301s should be used over 302. But the more I've run into https:// (with very brilliant IT guys), they always use 302s.
I've always wanted to understand the implications behind using 302s from the IT perspective - because from an optimization perspective, there is normally no doubt a 301 should be used.
Thank you.
-
It doesn't totally answer it I don't think, but it may shed light onto the issue. It could be a server specific/site specific kind of need as to why they are doing this.
-
Mike,
This is a really interesting question. The assumption is they are wanting a user to access the site securely every time. I cannot think of a reason for this not to be 301. I am assuming it is not from a single error page or other "event." I am guessing that someone within the Moz community will have an answer; it may be that they are doing it incorrectly.Best
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
-
Switched from and HTTPS to HTTP. My home page is facing a redirect issue from the http to https. Should I no index the HTTP or find the redirect and delete it? Thank you
Switched from and HTTPS to HTTP. My home page is facing a redirect issue from the http to https. Should I no index the HTTP or find the redirect and delete it? Thank you
Technical SEO | | LandmarkRecovery20170 -
Using http: shorthand inside canonical tag ("//" instead of "http:") can cause harm?
HI, I am planning to launch a new site, and shortly after to move to HTTPS. to save the need to change over 5,000 canonical tags in pages the webmaster suggested we implement inside the rel canonical "//" instead of the absolute path, would that do any damage or be a problem? oranges-south-dakota" />
Technical SEO | | Kung_fu_Panda0 -
Does any one have experience with SEO and .NET using 301 redirects?
A while ago I altered some of the URL's of my website. Google now thinks that I have two duplicate pages (duplicate content), I have asked my third party web developers (Who use .NET and a custom built CMS system) to simply 301 redirect the old URL to the other. However, my web developers say the following: "Solving the problems by 301 permanent re directs are out of the question as this would create infinite loops. Likely to bring down our server." They also wont do a canonical, as they say there is only one page (but two URLs) Firstly, has any one heard of this before and do they think this is true? Also, does anyone have an alternative method of getting rid of the old URL? Any thoughts would be much appreciated.
Technical SEO | | CoGri0 -
Where is the 301 redirect?
Hi, in the last week I take an issue for 301 permanent redirect for a subfolder in the main website! In that folder i have a index.php file for a google map fullscreen edition and the only link who connects the wordpress website with the subfolder is only a direct link! Is that an error of seomoz app or something else? Thanks 1.jpg
Technical SEO | | petrospan0 -
Switching from a .org to .io (301 domain redirect)
I'm considering switching my main site from a .org to .io address; the .org is an exact match domain which helped to kickstart it a few years ago and now has about 50% repeat visitors, but was thrown off the Apple affiliation program for trademark infringement. I've found and purchased a nice (non-infringing) .io domain, and I've read the advice here on how to properly 301 the old domain; but my question is - does it matter that it's .io? Is this going to significantly hurt my rankings, even when everything has been 301'd properly? Another thought I had is that I may actually come out better off in the long run, what with Google penalties being applied to exact match domains. Is this a ranking suicide? If so, I'm tempted to leave it as is; even without the affiliation, it's making a good amount every month in ad fees that I don't want to disrupt. Thanks all!
Technical SEO | | w0lfiesmithUK0 -
301 redirecting a mobile site.
Is it possible to selectively 301 redirect mobile/tablet user agents and google robots from the desktop version of a website to a mobile site? Would this preserve the SEO for the desktop website while optimizing the mobile/tablet site for mobile SEO?
Technical SEO | | inc.com0 -
Will Google index a 301 redirect for a new site?
So here is the problem... We have setup a 301redirect for our clients website. When you search the clients name it comes up with the old .co.uk website. We have made this redirect to the new .com website. However on the SERPs when it shows the .co.uk it shows the old title pages which currently say 'Holding Page'. When you click on that link it takes you to the fully functioning .com website. My question is, will the title tags in the SERPs which show the .co.uk update to the new ones from the .com? I'm thinking it will be just a case of Google catching up on things and it will sort itself out eventually. If anyone could help I would REALLY appreciate it. Thanks Chris
Technical SEO | | Weerdboil0 -
Is a 302 redirect the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page?
Hi guys The widely followed SEO best practice is that 301 redirects should be used instead of 302 redirects when it is a permanent redirect that is required. Matt Cutts said last year that 302 redirects should "only" be used for temporary redirects. http://www.seomoz.org/blog/whiteboard-interview-googles-matt-cutts-on-redirects-trust-more For a site that I am looking at the SEO Moz Crawll Diagnostics tool lists as an issue that the URL / redirects to www.abc.com/Pages/default.aspx with a 302 redirect. On further searching I found that on a Google Support forum (http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=276539078ba67f48&hl=en) that a Google Employee had said "For what it's worth, a 302 redirect is the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page (such as from "/" to "/sites/bursa/"). This is one of the few situations where a 302 redirect is preferred over a 301 redirect." Can anyone confirm if it is the case that "a 302 redirect is the correct redirect from a root URL to a detail page"? And if so why as I haven't found an explanation. If it is the correct best practice then should redirects of this nature be removed from displaying as issues in the SEO Moz Crawll Diagnostics tool Thanks for your help
Technical SEO | | CPU0