What is best practice to eliminate my IP addr content from showing in SERPs?
-
Our eCommerce platform provider has our site load balanced in a few data centers. Our site has two of our own exclusive IP addresses associated with it (one in each data center).
Problem is Google is showing our IP addresses in the SERPs with what I would assume is bad duplicate content (our own at that).
I brought this to the attention of our provider and they say they must keep the IP addresses open to allow their site monitoring software to work. Their solution was to add robots.txt files for both IP addresses with site wide/root disallows.
As a side note, we just added canonical tags so the pages indexed within the IP addresses ultimately show the correct URL (non IP address) via the canonical.
So here are my questions.
-
Is there a better way?
-
If not, is there anything else we need to do get Google to drop the several hundred thousand indexed pages at the IP address level? Or do we sit back and wait now?
-
-
I would allow Google to crawl those pages for a little while longer just to ensure that they see the rel canonical tags. Then once you feel that they have recrawled the IP address pages you can disallow them again if you want, thought that isn't entirely necessary if you have the rel canonical tag set up properly.
Another option would be to 301 redirect the IP version of the page to the corresponding www. version.
If they still don't drop from the index you can use the URL Removal Tool in GWT, but you will have to set up a GWT account for each of the IP domains.
-
Thanks. Any suggestions on how to get Google to drop these pages (make them inactive)?
-
Hi,
Since doing the disallow on the IP address sites, they are no longer getting crawled.
** The disavow list won't stop google crawl those domain / pages. Google will just treat those links as no follow - so they won't pass Page Rank.
You will still see those in Web master tools, the links will still be active.
-
Sorry - I just thought of something that could pose a problem and was hoping to get your advice.
Since doing the disallow on the IP address sites, they are no longer getting crawled. Does that mean that the canonical tags within those IP address sites wont be able to do their work?
Or
Will the canonicals picked up from the proper domain help the search engines know they should consolidate the indexed pages from the now disallowed IP addresses?
I am seeing that the IP addresses are no longer being crawled, and the pages in their indexes about the same (not going down).
Thoughts?
-
Sorry - I just thought of something that could pose a problem and was hoping to get your advice.
Since doing the disallow on the IP address sites, they are no longer getting crawled. Does that mean that the canonical tags within those IP address sites wont be able to do their work?
Or
Will the canonicals picked up from the proper domain help the search engines know they should consolidate the indexed pages from the now disallowed IP addresses?
I am seeing that the IP addresses are no longer being crawled, and the pages in their indexes about the same (not going down).
Thoughts?
-
Thanks!
-
Thanks. We are getting large daily crawls (nearly 100k a day) so fingers crossed this will sort it out soon.
-
Hi,
The canonical solution should be enough however I would still build some xml sitemaps and submit those via Web master Tools to speed the process. You can also build some html sitemaps with a clear structure and add those in the footer - again, to speed up the proces a little bit.
If you split the content into multiple xml sitemaps you can also track the crawling process.
You should also check your crawling speed in Web Master Tools to see how many pages in avarage the google bot is hitting each day - based on those numbers you can run some prediction on how long it will take more or less for google to re crawl your pages.
If your numbers is "bad" you will need to improve it some how to help with process - it can do wonders...
Hope it helps.
-
The canonical solution you have implemented is perfect. If you have decent authority and get deep crawls every couple days, you should be fine and pages from your IP should start to disappear shortly.
I would not worry about it anymore. You are on the right track. Sit back, relax and enjoy your flight
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
-
SERP cannibalization
Hi Moz Community, Recently I've been seeing multiple pages from my eCommerce site pop up in the SERPS for a couple of queries. Usually I would count this as a good thing but since both pages that generally pop up are so similar I'm starting to wonder if we would rank better with just one page. My example is the query "birthday gifts" Both of the URL's below show up in the search results one after the other on the first page. The URL on the top is our family page and the one below it is our subcat page, you can find both in the top nav. of our site. www.uncommongoods.com/gifts/birthday-gifts/birthday-gifts (family) www.uncommongoods.com/gifts/birthday-gifts (subcat) Both of these pages have different PA's and the subcat page that currently lives in our site nav is actually: **www.uncommongoods.com/gifts/birthday-**gifts?view=all. ****This url doesn't show up in the serps and is rel=canonicaled to the subcat page without the parameter listed above. We use this page in the nav because we think it's a better user experience than the actual subcat page. If we were to condense all three pages into one would we rank higher? Any thoughts here would be appreciated. Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | znotes0 -
Sitemap and content question
This is our primary sitemap https://www.samhillbands.com/sitemaps/sitemap.xml We have a about 750 location based URL's that aren't currently linked anywhere on the site. https://www.samhillbands.com/sitemaps/locations.xml Google is indexing most of the URL because we submitted the locations sitemap directly for indexing. Thoughts on that? Should we just create a page that contains all of the location links and make it live on the site? Should we remove the locations sitemap from separate indexing...because of duplicate content? # Sitemap Type Processed Issues Items Submitted Indexed --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- 1 /sitemaps/locations.xml Sitemap May 10, 2016 - Web 771 648 2 /sitemaps/sitemap.xml Sitemap index May 8, 2016 - Web 862 730
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | brianvest0 -
"No index" page still shows in search results and paginated pages shows page 2 in results
I have "no index, follow" on some pages, which I set 2 weeks ago. Today I see one of these pages showing in Google Search Results. I am using rel=next prev on pages, yet Page 2 of a string of pages showed up in results before Page 1. What could be the issue?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | khi50 -
Best practice with duplicate content. Cd
Our website has recently been updated, now it seems that all of our products pages look like this cdnorigin.companyname.com/catagory/product Google is showing these pages within the search. rather then companyname.com/catagory/product Each product page does have a canaonacal tag on that points to the cdnorigin page. Is this best practice? i dont think that cdnorigin.companyname etc looks very goon in the search. is there any reason why my designer would set the canonical tags up this way?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Alexogilvie0 -
Best practices for handling https content?
Hi Mozzers - I'm having an issue with https content on my site that I need help with. Basically we have some pages that are meant to be secured, cart pages, auth pages, etc, and then we have the rest of the site that isn't secured. I need those pages to load correctly and independently of one another so that we are using both protocols correctly. Problem is - when a secure page is rendered the resources behind it (scripts, etc) won't load with the unsecured paths that are in our master page files currently. One solution would be to render the entire site in https only, however this really scares me from an SEO standpoint. I don't know if I want to put my eggs in that basket. Another solution is to structure the site so that secure pages are built differently from unsecured pages, but that requires a bit of re-structuring and new SOPs to be put in place. I guess my question is really about best practices when using https. How can I avoid duplication issues? When do I need to use rel=canonical? What is the best way to do things here to avoid heavy maintenance moving forward?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | CodyWheeler0 -
Bi-Lingual Site: Lack of Translated Content & Duplicate Content
One of our clients has a blog with an English and Spanish version of every blog post. It's in WordPress and we're using the Q-Translate plugin. The problem is that my company is publishing blog posts in English only. The client is then responsible for having the piece translated, at which point we can add the translation to the blog. So the process is working like this: We add the post in English. We literally copy the exact same English content to the Spanish version, to serve as a placeholder until it's translated by the client. (*Question on this below) We give the Spanish page a placeholder title tag, so at least the title tags will not be duplicate in the mean time. We publish. Two pages go live with the exact same content and different title tags. A week or more later, we get the translated version of the post, and add that as the Spanish version, updating the content, links, and meta data. Our posts typically get indexed very quickly, so I'm worried that this is creating a duplicate content issue. What do you think? What we're noticing is that growth in search traffic is much flatter than it usually is after the first month of a new client blog. I'm looking for any suggestions and advice to make this process more successful for the client. *Would it be better to leave the Spanish page blank? Or add a sentence like: "This post is only available in English" with a link to the English version? Additionally, if you know of a relatively inexpensive but high-quality translation service that can turn these translations around quicker than my client can, I would love to hear about it. Thanks! David
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | djreich0 -
The system shows duplicate content for the same page (main domain and index.html). Is this an error of SEOMOZ?
Should I be worried that this will affect SEO? Most sites redirect to the index.html page, right? [edited by staff to remove toolbar data]
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | moskowman0 -
BEING PROACTIVE ABOUT CONTENT DUPLICATION...
So we all know that duplicate content is bad for SEO. I was just thinking... Whenever I post new content to a blog, website page etc...there should be something I should be able to do to tell Google (in fact all search engines) that I just created and posted this content to the web... that I am the original source .... so if anyone else copies it they get penalised and not me... Would appreciate your answers... 🙂 regards,
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | TopGearMedia0