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
-
Why do the competitive link analysis numbers not match the domain analysis?
There is only one area that our competitor out ranks us and that is in the total links on the root domain. But when i go to competitive link analysis we have more links then they do. Any ideas?
Moz Pro | | d_friess0 -
Does MozAuthority calculates the MozAuthority of each incoming link?
Hey Mozzers! So as I'm checking MozAuthority as a primary parameter to determine if a co-operation with a website is worthwhile, I did notice that it's mainly based on QUANTITY of inbound links. My question is this: Does my site's MozAuthority calculates The same parameter from each incoming link? Example: My site, www.google.com, has 5 incoming links from low MozAuthority domains. Your site, www.facebook.com, has 5 incoming links from medium MozAuthority domains. His site, www.yahoo.com has 5 incoming links from high MozAuthority domains. Will the 3rd case necessarily have a higher MozAuthority than #1 and #2?
Moz Pro | | Yoav_Vilner0 -
Duplicate pages with canonical links still show as errors
On our CMS, there are duplicate pages such as /news, /news/, /news?page=1, /news/?page=1. From an SEO perspective, I'm not too worried, because I guess Google is pretty capable of sorting this out, but to be on the safe side, I've added canonical links. /news itself has no link, but all the other variants have links to "/news". (And if you go wild and add a bunch of random meaningless parameters, creating /news/?page=1&jim=jam&foo=bar&this=that, we will laugh at you and generate a canonical link back to "/news". We're clever like that.) So far so good. And everything appears to work fine. But SEOMoz is still flagging up errors about duplicate titles and duplicate content. If you click in, you'll see a "Note" on each error, showing that SEOMoz has found the canonical link. So SEOMoz knows the duplication isn't a problem, as we're using canonical links exactly the way they're supposed to be used, and yet is still flagging it as an error. Is this something I should be concerned about, or is it just a bug in SEOMoz?
Moz Pro | | LockyDotser0 -
SEO Moz Tools - too many on the page links result driving me nuts
A while back I remember Rand and I having a conversation about how many links on the page and up until that point I had followed the NO MORE THAN 100 links on a page rule - which is what the MOZ tools are telling me now in the campaigns I have running. But then during a seminar both of us were holding this 100 link rule question came up and Rand commented that this was probably old hat now as the search engines can crawl a much greater number of links in the page. I was encouraged by his answer especially where ecommerce websites are concerned. But the MOZ tool is driving me nuts telling me that this 100 link rule is still something to be adhered too. It is especially frustrating when we are discussing ecommerce website sites with editable mega menus. Examples to support this question are www.bohemiadesign.co.uk or www.flowersbuydelivery.co.uk which are 2 ecommerce sites I am aware of using such mega menus that are editable and give a link count greater than 100. and I am sure there are many more sites like this, even Amazon for example. So, how much notice do we take of this warning in MOZ tools that is telling me about excessive numbers of links on the pages it lists as needing corrected?
Moz Pro | | ICTADVIS0 -
How to get rid of the message "Search Engine blocked by robots.txt"
During the Crawl Diagnostics of my website,I got a message Search Engine blocked by robots.txt under Most common errors & warnings.Please let me know the procedure by which the SEOmoz PRO Crawler can completely crawl my website?Awaiting your reply at the earliest. Regards, Prashakth Kamath
Moz Pro | | 1prashakth0 -
Can someone explain why I have been seeing an increase in the number of Linking Page URLs in OSE that link directly to downloads?
Ever since the last couple Linkscape updates when doing competitive back link analysis I have noticed a large increase in the number of URLs of Linking Pages in OSE that result in an immediate file download. The majority of the time these downloads are not common files ie PDF, DOC files. For example, these were all in a competitors back link profile: http://download.unesp.br/linux/debian/pool/main/i/isc-dhcp/isc-dhcp-relay-dbg_4.1.1-P1-17_ia64.deb http://snow.fmi.fi/data/20090210_eurasia_sd_025grid.mat http://www.rose-hulman.edu/class/me/HTML/ES204_0708_S/working model examples/Le25 mad hatter.wm?a=p&id=145880&g=5&p=sia&date=iso&o=ajgrep These are just a few I came across for a single competitor. Is this sketchy black hat SEO, some sort of error, actual links, or something else? Any information on this subject would be helpful. Thank you.
Moz Pro | | Gyi0 -
Will Open Site Explorer ever show number of links over time?
OSE is an amazing tool, but do you guys at SEOmoz have any plans to develop it so we can track numbers of links over time. I need to demonstrate to clients how the link building is going, and this would be a great quick report to see how many links you found on a given day, month, year, etc. A bit like magesticSEO backlink history graph, but better 🙂
Moz Pro | | timwills0