Search Results

Search found 52885 results on 2116 pages for 'http redirect'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 6/2116 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Homepage 301 Redirect to SSL Homepage

    - by user33692
    I'm hoping somebody might be able to provide a bit of advice on an issue I am having. I have 1 site where we implemented a 301 redirect on the homepage from http to https. We have links on the homepage to other parts of the site that are not under SSL (in fact there is only one other page under SSL). When I go to our webmaster account I notice that we are not being provided with any webmaster information (search queries, backlinks) related to our homepage under SSL. I performed a Fetch Google on the homepage and the information it returned is: HTTP/1.1 301 Moved Permanently Date: Fri, 08 Nov 2013 17:26:24 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.16 (Debian) Location: https://mysite.com/ Vary: Accept-Encoding Content-Encoding: gzip Content-Length: 242 Keep-Alive: timeout=15, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML 2.0//EN"> <html><head> <title>301 Moved Permanently</title> </head><body> <h1>Moved Permanently</h1> <p>The document has moved <a href="https://mysite.com/">here</a>.</p> <hr> <address>Apache/2.2.16 (Debian) Server at mysite.com</address> </body></html> I am worried that the fact that Google Fetch is not getting the correct Title Tags and Meta information from our homepage and that this is hurting our search results. Additionally, I am worried that we need to do something specific with the SiteMap to ensure that Google is correctly indexing all our pages and being able to flow from the https to the http without issues. Does anybody have any advice on how we can correctly set this up or be sure that Google is fetching the correct information?

    Read the article

  • Rankings dropping after small URL-change WITH 301-redirect

    - by David
    Two weeks ago, we attempted to make the URLs of ca. 12 pages more search-engine friendly. We changed three things. 1. Make URLs more SEF from: /????-????/brandname.html (meaning: /aircon-price/daikin.html to: /????-brandnameinenglish-brandnameinthai.html We set up 301-redirects from the old to the new URLs. You can find an example and the link to our page here: http://bit.ly/XRoTOK There are no direct external links to the old URLs. 2. Added text to img-links from homepage to brand-pages Before those changes, we only linked to those brands with a picture, so we added some text under the picture. You can see that here, in the left submenu: http://bit.ly/XRpfoF 3. Minor changes to Title, h1-Tags, Meta Description, etc. Only minor changes, to better match the on-site optimization with targeted keywords. For example, before we used full brand names, after we used what was really searched for: from: Mitsubishi Electric Mr. Slim to: ???? Mitsubishi (means: Aircon Mitsubishi) Three days after these changes, we noticed a heavy drop (80% loss in non-paid search traffic) in rankings and traffic for those pages, and also for all pages which are sub-categorized. Rankings for all keywords not affected by the changes stayed the same. Any ideas, what happened, and how we can regain our old rankings? What we already did, was submitting a new sitemap. Help much appreciated. Best regards, David

    Read the article

  • Amazon S3 Tips: Quickly Add/Modify HTTP Headers To All Files Recursively

    - by Gopinath
    Amazon S3 is an dead cheap cloud storage service that offers unlimited storage in pay as you use model. Recently we moved all the images and other static files(scripts & css) of Tech Dreams to Amazon S3 to reduce load on VPS server. Amazon S3 is cheap, but monthly bill will shoot up if images/static files of the blog are not cached properly (more details). By adding caching HTTP Headers Cache-Control or Expires to all the files hosted on Amazon S3 we reduced the monthly bills and also load time of blog pages. Lets see how to add custom headers to files stored on Amazon S3 service. Updating HTTP Headers of one file at a time The web interface of Amazon S3 Management console allows adding custom HTTP headers to one file at a time  through “Properties”  window (to access properties, right on a file and select Properties menu). So if you have to add headers to 100s of files then this is not the way to go! Updating HTTP Headers of multiple files of a folder recursively To update HTTP headers of multiple files in a folder recursively, we can use CloudBerry Explorer freeware or Bucket Explorer trail ware applications. CloudBerry is my favourite as it’s a freeware and also it’s has excellent interface to access Amazon S3 from desktops. Adding HTTP Headers with CloudBerry application is straight forward – right click on the required folders and choose the option “Set HTTP Headers”. Download CloudBerry Explorer This article titled,Amazon S3 Tips: Quickly Add/Modify HTTP Headers To All Files Recursively, was originally published at Tech Dreams. Grab our rss feed or fan us on Facebook to get updates from us.

    Read the article

  • Preserving case in HTTP headers with Ruby's Net:HTTP

    - by emh
    Although the HTTP spec says that headers are case insensitive; Paypal, with their new adaptive payments API require their headers to be case-sensitive. Using the paypal adaptive payments extension for ActiveMerchant (http://github.com/lamp/paypal_adaptive_gateway) it seems that although the headers are set in all caps, they are sent in mixed case. Here is the code that sends the HTTP request: headers = { "X-PAYPAL-REQUEST-DATA-FORMAT" => "XML", "X-PAYPAL-RESPONSE-DATA-FORMAT" => "JSON", "X-PAYPAL-SECURITY-USERID" => @config[:login], "X-PAYPAL-SECURITY-PASSWORD" => @config[:password], "X-PAYPAL-SECURITY-SIGNATURE" => @config[:signature], "X-PAYPAL-APPLICATION-ID" => @config[:appid] } build_url action request = Net::HTTP::Post.new(@url.path) request.body = @xml headers.each_pair { |k,v| request[k] = v } request.content_type = 'text/xml' proxy = Net::HTTP::Proxy("127.0.0.1", "60723") server = proxy.new(@url.host, 443) server.use_ssl = true server.start { |http| http.request(request) }.body (i added the proxy line so i could see what was going on with Charles - http://www.charlesproxy.com/) When I look at the request headers in charles, this is what i see: X-Paypal-Application-Id ... X-Paypal-Security-Password... X-Paypal-Security-Signature ... X-Paypal-Security-Userid ... X-Paypal-Request-Data-Format XML X-Paypal-Response-Data-Format JSON Accept */* Content-Type text/xml Content-Length 522 Host svcs.sandbox.paypal.com I verified that it is not Charles doing the case conversion by running a similar request using curl. In that test the case was preserved.

    Read the article

  • Trace redirect loop

    - by Michel Krämer
    I have a large PHP application. After I changed some settings I get a redirection loop (i.e. the browser is redirected to the same page over and over again). The problem is that I don't know which command (which line in which PHP file) in this application causes the redirect. Is there a way to trace calls to the header() function? Or - even better - is there a way to trace redirects in PHP? Thanks in advance, Michel

    Read the article

  • Best way to provide folder level 301 redirect

    - by Vinay
    I have a website hosted in yahoo small business, I don't have access to .htaccess file. I have around 220 pages in a folder 'mysubfolder' (http://mysite.com/myfolder/mysubfolder). And the age of website is around 3 years. I am planning to move all 220 pages in 'mysubfolder' to 'myfolder' (one level up). All the pages are under 'mysubfolder' are indexed. what is the best way to do this.So that it should not affects the SEO.

    Read the article

  • folder level 301 redirect without .htaccess

    - by Vinay
    I have a website hosted in yahoo small business, I don't have access to .htaccess file. I have around 220 pages in a folder 'mysubfolder' (http://mysite.com/myfolder/mysubfolder). And the age of website is around 3 years. I am planning to move all 220 pages in 'mysubfolder' to 'myfolder' (one level up). All the pages in 'mysubfolder' are indexed. what is the best way to do this.So that it should not affects the SEO.

    Read the article

  • 301 redirect to different directory on Yahoo Small Business Hosting without .htaccess

    - by Vinay
    I have a website hosted with Yahoo Small Business Hosting, and I don't have access to use a .htaccess file. I have around 220 pages in a folder mysubfolder (http://example.com/myfolder/mysubfolder) and the age of website is around 3 years. I am planning to move all 220 pages in mysubfolder to myfolder (one level up). All the pages in mysubfolder are indexed. What is the best way to do this, so that it wouldn't affect my SEO.

    Read the article

  • Apache 301 redirect

    - by mcondiff
    I have inherited a server with a couple of domains on it. The website was reworked within the last two years and I am trying to oblige a request by staff to get a redirect to work properly (if it can given the default structure). So right now on the server I have a redirect that takes every 301 and dumps it onto the front page of the website. RedirectMatch /(.) http://www.example.com This has worked well for most of the old URL's coming in from various websites containing the old liking structure. However, now a staff member wants a single URL which is somewhat widely used to be redirected to it's proper place. Redirect /new/research/Exp_Rese_Disc/Asia/example.shtml http://example.com/asia/ Is this possible without killing the all encompassing 301 redirect? To have a general RedirectMatch /(.) redirect as well as a singular redirect? As of right now it is not seeming to let me. Any ideas, thoughts or examples are much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Redirect based on referer's url

    - by steve
    I am trying to redirect visitors to a site based on their referring url. Here is the script: php $domain='blankds.com'; $referrer=$_SERVER['HTTP_REFERER']; echo $referrer; if (preg_match("/$domain/",$referrer)) { header('Location: http://www.blackisgreen.org/page_1.php'); } else { header('Location: http://www.blackisgreen.org/page_2.php'); }; Errors: I get a "Warning: cannot modify header" error because I am echoing $referrer before sending headers. If I remove the echo the script does not work. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • HTTP 2.0 : Microsoft propose « HTTP Speed+Mobility » pour augmenter la vitesse du Web

    HTTP 2.0 : Microsoft propose « HTTP Speed+Mobility » pour augmenter la vitesse du Web Microsoft veut augmenter la vitesse du Web et propose à L'IETF, Internet Engineering Task Force, l'organisme chargé de la standardisation de l'internet, des éléments pour le protocole HTTP 2.0. Après Google avec son projet SPDY ayant pour objectif de doubler la vitesse du Web en apportant des ajustements au protocole HTTP par une couche supérieure, c'est au tour de la firme de Redmond de montrer son intérêt pour l'avenir du Web. Dans un billet de blog publié récemment, la firme présente sa proposition ?HTTP Speed+Mobility? qui sera soumise au groupe de travail HTTPbis.

    Read the article

  • htaccess 301 redirect for payment page

    - by Chris Robinson
    I have a client who currently runs a venue and has ticket purchases made available through a third party. The way the site currently works is that there is a standard href in the nav menu to the ticket purchasing site. <a href'http://example.com/events'>Events</a> <a href'http://example.com/about'>About</a> <a href'https://someticketvendor.com/myclient?blah'>Tickets</a> They claim that they want to improve their SEO by appearing to integrate the ticket pages into their site. Having spoken to the ticket vendor, they only offer integration through iframes which is just horrible. I don't really know much about SEO but I'm wondering if I can create an htaccess rule to have http://example.com/tickets forward to href'https://someticketvendor.com/myclient?blah Are they are any negative SEO implications to doing this? Is there a better way this could be done?

    Read the article

  • 301 redirect from a country specific domain

    - by Raj
    I originally started using a .do domain extension for my site, but later realized that this country specific domain would prevent us from appearing in search results for places outside of the Dominican Republic. We started using a .co domain extension and redirected all requests to the new domain using an HTTP 301. The "Crawl Stats" in Google Webmaster Tools shows me that the .co domain is being crawled, but the "Index Status" shows the number of pages indexed at 0. The "Crawl Stats" for the .do domain says that it's being crawled and the "Index Status" shows a number greater than 0. I also set a "Change Of Address" in Google Webmaster Tools to have the .do domain point to the new .co domain. We're still not appearing in search results at all even for very specific strings where I would expect to find us. Am I doing something wrong?

    Read the article

  • Why can't I set a cookie and redirect?

    - by Damian
    I´m having a problem setting a cookie and doing a 302 redirect In chrome the cookie is not being set (I haven't tested safari), in other browsers I was having the same problem until I added Path=/ to the cookie an now it works. This is how the header looks; the status is 302 Found Content-Type text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Expires Thu, 01 Jan 1970 00:00:00 GMT Set-Cookie alasca-flash=error-Message<Required<error-Name<Required<error-Sex<Required<error-Age<Required<;Path=/ Location /messages/sdf Content-Length 0 Server Jetty(6.1.x) Any idea on why the cookie is not set? Or any workaround? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • 302 Redirect to Images in IE8 do not render image

    - by empire29
    I am helping migrate a legacy application. One of the requirements is we are able to handle requests for old images. What we have is: New site on new.com Old site on old.com Images to links (imported content) point to /imgs/cat.png however the actual image is hosted on old.com/assets/images/cat.png (for now). <img src="/imgs/cat.png"/> I setup a redirect for all png, jpg, jpeg, gif that 302's requests for new.com/imgs/(.*).(png|jpg|jpeg|gif) to http://old.com/assets/images/$1.$2 Everything works find in Chrome, Firefox and IE9 - however it was noted in IE8 the image does not render. Its possible that it has the same issue in IE7, 6 and 5.5 however I have not been able to test this. Does anyone know why this is happening and how to fix? I tried setting the contentType header on the response of the 302's to image/(png|jpg|jpeg|gif) and this did not have any impact. Any insight would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Http header 304 and caching?

    - by Royi Namir
    Our company uses these settings( don't ask me why) - for every request they want a new request from server. this is an intranet system which uses only IE. They defined it in : We also have windows authentication NTLM in the iis7. I have 2 questions please. Question #1) when the browser make a request ( css ) : (leave the 401 response for now - this is how ntlm works) He is requesting it with if-modified-since header. why is he adding this header ? How can I configure it ? why doesn't he use the settings from IE and try to download it each time - as I showed in the first picture ? Question #2) The response ( after ntlm negotiation) for that was : Response with Not-modified which is 304 header. and I assume its because we sent the request with the if-modified-since header. But there is a problem. He is actually tells me to download from my cache. But I told him explicitly in the IE settings - not to load from cache. Wham am I missing here ? Thanks a lot.

    Read the article

  • Redirect 301 fails with a path as destination

    - by Martijn Heemels
    I'm using a large number of Redirect 301's which are suddenly failing on a new webserver. We're in pre-production tests on the new webserver, prior to migrating the sites, but some sites are failing with 500 Internal Server Error. The content, both databases and files, are mirrored from the old to the new server, so we can test if all sites work properly. I traced this problem to mod_alias' Redirect statement, which is used from .htaccess to redirect visitors and search engines from old content to new pages. Apparently the Apache server requires the destination to be a full url, including protocol and hostname. Redirect 301 /directory/ /target/ # Not Valid Redirect 301 /main.html / # Not Valid Redirect 301 /directory/ http://www.example.com/target/ # Valid Redirect 301 /main.html http://www.example.com/ # Valid This contradicts the Apache documentation for Apache 2.2, which states: The new URL should be an absolute URL beginning with a scheme and hostname, but a URL-path beginning with a slash may also be used, in which case the scheme and hostname of the current server will be added. Of course I verified that we're using Apache 2.2 on both the old and the new server. The old server is a Gentoo box with Apache 2.2.11, while the new one is a RHEL 5 box with Apache 2.2.3. The workaround would be to change all paths to full URL's, or to convert the statements to mod_rewrite rules, but I'd prefer the documented behaviour. What are your experiences?

    Read the article

  • Lots of http HEAD requests originating from porn sites

    - by Don Corley
    My access log on my web server has a ton of http HEAD requests coming from porn sites. What are HEAD requests and are they doing something bad with my site? Here is an excerpt from my log: (valid request) 96.251.177.249 - - [02/Jan/2011:23:42:25 -0800] "POST /ajax HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "http://www.mywebsite.com/abc.html" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US) AppleWebKit/534.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/7.0.517.44 Safari/534.7" 80.153.114.208 - - [02/Jan/2011:23:43:11 -0800] "HEAD / HTTP/1.0" 302 185 "http://www.somepornsite.com" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; it-IT; rv:1.9.0.2) Gecko/2008092313 Ubuntu/9.25 (jaunty) Firefox/3.8" 80.153.114.208 - - [02/Jan/2011:23:43:11 -0800] "HEAD /tourappxsl HTTP/1.0" 200 16871 "http://www.somepornsite.com" "Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; it-IT; rv:1.9.0.2) Gecko/2008092313 Ubuntu/9.25 (jaunty) Firefox/3.8" I changed only the web addresses in this log. Thanks for any ideas, Don

    Read the article

  • Mod Rewrite - directing HTTP/HTTPS traffic to the appropriate virtual hosts

    - by kce
    I have an Apache2 web server (v. 2.2.16) running on Debian hosting three virtual hosts. The first two hosts are HTTP only (server1 and server2). The last host is HTTPS only (server3). My virtual host configuration files can be found at pastebin. I would like to use mod rewrite to get the following behavior: Any request for http://server3 is re-directed to https://server3 Any request for either https://server1 or https://server2 is re-directed to http://server1 or http://server2 as appropriate. Currently, requesting http://server3 gives you a 403 because indexing is disabled for that host and a request for https://server1 or https://server2 will resolve as https://server3 (as its the only virtual host running SSL). This behavior is not desirable. So far I have added a rewrite rule to the central configuration file (myServerWideConfs.conf), with unfortunately no effect. I was under the impression that this rule (or something similar) should rewrite all https:// requests for server1 and server2 to the proper http:// request. RewriteEngine On RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} !^server3 [NC] RewriteRule (.*) http://%{HTTP_HOST} My question is two-fold: What mod rewrite rules should I use to accomplish this? And where should they go? Debian's packaging of Apache has a pretty granular (i.e., fractured) configuration file layout; should my rewrite rules go in /etc/apache2/apache2.conf, /etc/apache2/conf.d/myServerWideConfs.conf, or the individual virtual host files? Is mod rewrite the right tool to accomplish this or am I missing something in my greater apache configuration?

    Read the article

  • http to https upgrade -- SEO troubles

    - by SLIM
    I upgraded my site so that all pages have gone from using http to https. I didn't consider that Google treats https pages differently than http. I re-created my sitemap to so that all links now reflect the new https and let it be for a few days. (Whoops!) Google is now re-indexing all https pages. I have about 19k pages on the site, and Google has already indexed about 8k of the new https. The problem is that Google sees all of these as brand new pages when many of them have a long http history. Of course most of you will recognize the problem, I didn't set up a 301 from the old http to the new https. Is it too late to do this? Should I switch my sitemap back to http and then 301 to the new https? Or should I leave the sitemap as is, and setup 301 redirects anyway.. I'm not even sure if Google is trying to reach the http site anymore. Currently the site is doing 303 redirects (from http to https), although I haven't figured out why yet. Thanks for any suggestions you can offer.

    Read the article

  • SEO redirects for removed pages

    - by adam
    Hi, Apologies if SO is not the right place for this, but there are 700+ other SEO questions on here. I'm a senior developer for a travel site with 12k+ pages. We completely redeveloped the site and relaunched in January, and with the volatile nature of travel, there are many pages which are no longer on the site. Examples: /destinations/africa/senegal.aspx /destinations/africa/features.aspx Of course, we have a 404 page in place (and it's a hard 404 page rather than a 30x redirect to a 404). Our SEO advisor has asked us to 30x redirect all our 404 pages (as found in Webmaster Tools), his argument being that 404's are damaging to our pagerank. He'd want us to redirect our Senegal and features pages above to the Africa page (which doesn't contain the content previously found on Senegal.aspx or features.aspx). An equivalent for SO would be taking a url for a removed question and redirecting it to /questions rather than showing a 404 'Question/Page not found'. My argument is that, as these pages are no longer on the site, 404 is the correct status to return. I'd also argue that redirecting these to less relevant pages could damage our SEO (due to duplicate content perhaps)? It's also very time consuming redirecting all 404's when our site takes some content from our in-house system, which adds/removes content at will. Thanks for any advice, Adam

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 IIS 7.0 HTTP to HTTPS Redirect -- Versus IIS 6.0 Mechanism

    - by Dan7el
    This topic, creating a mechanism for redirection from HTTP to HTTPS on a Windows 2008 server running IIS 7.0 is a much written-about topic on the Internet. How this is done is really not so much my issue. My issue is more of explaining why this can't be done with the standard HTTP Redirect module that ships with Windows 2008 IIS 7.0. Instead, there are other methods needed that are more arduous. First, the IIS 6.0 method requires no externally available modules nor does it require any additional modifications to the web.config or any type of other development effort. It's outlined here: http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/dorr/archive/2009/01/13/how-to-force-redirection-from-http-to-https-on-iis-6-0.aspx And, you can see the basic steps are to run the snap-in, get the properties on the site, and do some modifications. Presto, you have the HTTP -- HTTP redirect setup. Now, on the IIS 7.0 platform, it doesn't seem this simple. An initial search found the following site: http://www.sslshopper.com/iis7-redirect-http-to-https.html Which has two separate approcates: 1. Involves installing a separately available Microsoft module -- URL Rewrite Module, and then adding XML to the web.config. 2. Custom Error Page. ...there might be other methods, but these are the basic ones and the first is listed as the primary method. But wait...There exists on the IIS 7.0 an HTTP Redirect Module. So...why can't I use the HTTP Redirect Module to do this very thing? This is really my big question. I need to know this because my management is going to insist I use the HTTP Redirect Module and set up the HTTP to HTTPS redirect in a similar fashion to how we do in IIS 6.0. Can someone please explain to me, in clean, simple, easy to understand, terms that both I and my management can understand as to why I need to go get the URL Rewrite Module and install that on the server and make the web.config changes suggested by the article instead of simply using the HTTP Redirect module that's already installed on the site? Thanks a bunch.

    Read the article

  • Redirects in RoR: Which one to use?

    - by scrr
    Hello, we are making a website that takes a generated incoming link and forwards the user who is clicking on it to another website while saving a record of the action in our DB. I guess it's basically what ad-services like AdSense do. However, what is the best way to redirect the user? I think html-meta-tag-redirects are out of question. So what other options are there? head :moved_permanently, :location => "http://www.domain.com/" This one is a 301-redirect. The next one is a 302: redirect_to "http://www.domain.com" Are there any others? And which is best to use for our case? The links are highly-dynamic and change all the time. We want to make sure we don't violate any existing standards and of course we don't want search-engines to tag us as spammers (which we are not, btw). Thanks!

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >