Re: Cost of redirect and site domain switch? Good Practice / Bad Practice / Terrible Practice

On 08/17/2012 01:09 PM, Tristan wrote:

Sebastian, I'll check into 307 I haven't used that before but, this really is a permanent redirect. They are going to a shorter domain. About the SEO part of it though. Would it be good to find replace all internal links from somedomain.com to somenewdomain.com or will it follow the 301 with no punishment or cause any other weirdnesses you can think of. Thanks, T On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 1:56 PM, Sebastian Krebs<krebs.seb@gmail.com>wrote:

If you need to change the domain completely, choose "301". - Crawler will recognize it and will update their indexes quite soon. Especially you avoid "duplicate content"-punishments, because you say yourself, that the content originally comes from another domain, that isn't anymore (Like "It's not a duplicate, it's _the_ content, but under a different address"). - The delay is negliable. Also as soon as every index were updated no "new" visitor should enter your site via the old domain. Browser should (don't know wether they do, or not) recognize "301" too and redirect any further request to the url on their own (think of it as "they cache the redirect permanently"). If this change is only temporary I would recommend using "307" to avoid duplicate contents. I would even say, that a 307-redirect from somenewdomain.com to somedomain.com is more appropiate, but that depends. Regards, Sebastian

You could simply remove all full domain+path URL links and replace them with absolute path urls only. turn http://www.somedomain.com/path/to/my/webpage.html into /path/to/my/webpage.html This would work with either domain. -- Jim Lucas http://www.cmsws.com/ http://www.cmsws.com/examples/