IP address guideline for 2 sites on same server linking each other.
-
Hi Guys! I have two websites which link to each other but are on the same server. Both the sites have a great PR and link juice. I want to know what steps shall I take in order to make google feel that both the sites are not owned by me. Like shall i get different IP and different servers for both or something more?
Looking forward for you thoughts and help!
-
Thankx Irving for your inputs on this... I have a clear picture on this now
-
if domain registration is not private then they know this, if email addresses and physical addresses listed on the site are same they know same owner, if ips are the same they know same owner
if you do linking, link the lesser site to the main site only.
bottom line is if you are targeting the same keywords you are against Googles TOS because you're only supposed to have one site for your business.
-
That sounds good to start with I will check for all the factors. I am a bit not sure if search engines do consider domain registration details for this situation.
Thanks Rafi!
-
Hi Hitesh,
There are hell lot of signals that can be picked up by the search engines and find which bunch of websites belong to a person or organization. Let us not get in to those but if you are hell bent on how to fly safe under the radar and still be able to do cross linking you can look at changing the information with your domain name registrar (if both websites were registered using common name, address and stuff). Try changing the Admin, tech contact info and registrant info. You can definitely go in for a different IP and preferably a different class C IP. Look at the website architectural traces, design traces and anything in common like addresses etc. Despite doing all these, we can resist ourselves accessing both websites at the same time from the same machine and from same IP. The list continues... but if you have good content on both the sites and if you are not doing too much linking, you should be fine as there is nothing to worry about. Moreover, there is nothing wrong about linking all my websites with an intention to introduce my other websites to a visitor on one of my websites.
The conclusion is, if you are not doing a heavy cross linking, you don't need to worry about it. Above all, the domains' authority plays a big role in cases like this.
Good luck.
Best regards,
Devanur Rafi.
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
-
70 sites on one instance/server negative for SEO?
Hi Guys, One of our clients is building individual sites for each store they have, which in total would be 70 different websites on one server (they used the word instance). I was wondering if there could be negative issues with this for SEO purposes? Cheers, Mike
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | wozniak650 -
Link conundrum - losing nav/footer links in mobile view
Hi Moz folks! I'm currently moving a site from being hosted on www. and m. separately to a responsive single URL. The problem is, the desktop version currently has links to important landing pages in the footer (about 60) and that's not something we want to replicate on mobile (mainly because it will look pretty awful.) There is no navigation menu because the key to the homepage is to convert users to subscription so any distraction reduces conversion rate. The footer links will continue to exist on the desktop view but, since Google's mobile-first index, presumably we lose these important homepage links to our most important pages. So, my questions: Do you think there is any SEO value in the desktop footer links? Do you have any suggestions about how best to include these 60-odd links in a way that works for mobile? Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | d_foley0 -
Base href + relative link href for canonical link
I have a site that in the head section we specify a base href being the domain with a trailing slash and a canonical link href being the relative link to the domain. <base <="" span="">href="http://www.domain.com/" /> href="link-to-page.html" rel="canonical" /> I know that Google recommends using an absolute path as a canonical link but is specifying a base href with a relative canonical link the same thing or is it still seen as duplicate content?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Nobody16116990439410 -
installed PageSpeed Module on our server but no difference to site
Hi
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Direct_Ram
I have been searching for an answer for a while now and couldnt find it so maybe someone has had a similar problem. We have installed PageSpeed Module on our server. The administrator has said it is active and has run a test below: [root@mydomain ~]# curl -D- https://www.mydomain.com/ | head -10
% Total % Received % Xferd Average Speed Time Time Time Current
Dload Upload Total Spent Left Speed
14 102k 14 15029 0 0 40506 0 0:00:02 --:--:-- 0:00:02 64780HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Server: nginx/1.6.0
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2015 11:28:43 GMT
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Length: 104885
Connection: keep-alive
Set-Cookie: ci_session=BGANYlg8VmsPLgN1AWABMldkAGUGLVZwVmhQdQd0CGIEaFI6VgkEOQdmUSYHbQZyXz9TZVE4Vm4CIwxnB2hYbAZrAGUHZQg%2BUjUFOgRlUWAEYg05WDxWMg82A2ABOQEzV2IAaQZsVjBWPFA2BzEIaAQ%2FUjBWNwRmBztRJgdtBnJfP1NnUTpWbgIjDDoHflhSBjwAMgdjCHlSNAVwBHdRJwQ6DStYM1ZgD2YDPAF4ATJXZABmBiFWMVY%2FUD4HKQg5BDRSelZnBGAHIFE%2FByUGO180U2ZRMFZ2AnQMIAdrWH8GAgA3B2AIblI%2FBXcEJlE%2BBHINYlg4VmAPZwM8AXgBYFchAC0GY1YsVjpQKAc2CDIEKVJjVnYEeAd6UTwHYAZeXzNTYlEnViYCZAw3B2ZYbAYpAHsHawhiUj8FdgR8USgEZg02WHxWeA91A2oBMwFhVzcAKgZ9Vm9WIlAxBykIOgQ%2BUnpWYQRwB0xRVwcFBi5fNlN4UTtWYgIvDGEHIFg%2BBn0AFAdmCHhSOAVgBCRRQARCDRtYKVYrDzkDbwE4ASxXZQBxBj1WLVY%2BUCYHawhiBGVSPVYyBD4HLVE1B3gGMF89U3ZRZlY9AmMMIAd9WGUGbwB5BzYIJVJlBS0ENlEnBDoNK1gzVmAPZgM8AXgBb1c1ACwGe1ZcVmxQZQdzCGIEcVI9ViIEKQcgUT8HPwY7XzRTYlE4VmwCNwxlBztYPgZvAGUHPAh4UmsFOgQ%2BUScEdA0rWGxWIw8KA2IBOwF3VzUAfQY0VnBWN1A2Bz0IKQQlUm9WKw%3D%3D; expires=Fri, 10-Apr-2015 13:28:43 GMT; path=/
Set-Cookie: ci_session=a%3A0%3A%7B%7D; expires=Thu, 10-Apr-2014 21:28:43 GMT; path=/
Set-Cookie: ci_session=BWEFalk4UWwJKFIq; expires=Fri, 10-Apr-2015 13:28:43 GMT; path=/
X-Mod-Pagespeed: 1.9.32.3-4448 But there doesn't seem to be any difference to the sites speed or change in google speed test recommendations. I do not have much knowledge on servers but the server company has assured me it is active and all the filters are on - so not sure why I am not seeing anything different. if anyone has any advise on this it would be great. thanks E0 -
Lower quality new domain link vs higher quality repeat domain link
First time poster here with a dilemma that head scratching and spreadsheets can't solve! I'm trying to work out whether to focus on getting links from new domains or to nurture relationships with the bigger sites in our business and get more links. Of the two links below which does the community here think would be more valuable a signal to Google? Both would be links from within relevant text/post copy. Link 1. Site DA 30. No links currently from this domain. Link 2. Site DA 60. Many links over last 12 months already from this domain. I suspect link 1 but given the enormous disparity in ranking power am I correct?! Thanks for any considered opinions out there! Matthew
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | mat20150 -
URL Value: Menu Links vs Body Content Links
Hi All, I'm a little confused. I have read a number of articles from authority sites that give mixed signals over the importance of menu links vs body content links. It is suggested that whilst all menu links spread link juice equally, Google does not see them as favourably. Inserting a link within the body will add more link juice value to the desired page. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks Mark
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Mark_Ch0 -
Are reciprocal links with a Pandalized site harmful?
Hi, We have a reciprocal link exchange relationship with just 1 website, which is in the same industry as us. They do not have a reciprocal link exchange relationship with any site other than us. Bunches (3-5) of do-follow links to our website appear on approx 2k pages of theirs. We provide several hundred links back to them (1 per page). The links result in some decent traffic exchanged, but nothing significant or getting Pandalized over. Both our sites are in the 60+ domain authority range according to open site explorer. Both of our sites clearly got hit hard by Panda. From a purely SEO perspective, are these reciprocal links hurting us? I have read that Panda has nothing to do with links but I wanted to know if there is a possibly that this may be hurting us. At the time, many years ago, the link exchange seemed to help us rank better. Thanks.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Locutus1 -
Can I reduce number of on page links by just adding "no follow" tags to duplicate links
Our site works on templates and we essentially have a link pointing to the same place 3 times on most pages. The links are images not text. We are over 100 links on our on page attributes, and ranking fairly well for key SERPS our core pages are optimized for. I am thinking I should engage in some on-page link juice sculpting and add some "no follow" tags to 2 of the 3 repeated links. Although that being said the Moz's on page optimizer is not saying I have link cannibalization. Any thoughts guys? Hope this scenario makes sense.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | robertrRSwalters0