On Mar 30, 2011, at 4:55 PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
On Mar 30, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Alexander Harrowell a.harrow...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tuesday 29 Mar 2011 17:54:27 Wil Schultz wrote:
On Mar 29, 2011, at 3:51 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
And here's a breakdown of which user agents are seen
On Tuesday 29 Mar 2011 17:54:27 Wil Schultz wrote:
On Mar 29, 2011, at 3:51 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
And here's a breakdown of which user agents are seen on which ip, as you can
see the user-agent doesn't exactly match IP range.
Googlebot-Image/1.0
Mozilla/5.0 (compatible;
On Mar 30, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Alexander Harrowell a.harrow...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tuesday 29 Mar 2011 17:54:27 Wil Schultz wrote:
On Mar 29, 2011, at 3:51 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
And here's a breakdown of which user agents are seen on which ip, as you can
see the user-agent doesn't
On 3/31/11 11:55 , Wil Schultz wschu...@bsdboy.com wrote:
On Mar 30, 2011, at 4:39 PM, Alexander Harrowell a.harrow...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Tuesday 29 Mar 2011 17:54:27 Wil Schultz wrote:
On Mar 29, 2011, at 3:51 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
And here's a breakdown of which user agents are
On 3/29/11 10:18 , Wil Schultz wschu...@bsdboy.com wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
3) ??? Any others that I haven't thought of ???
So basically I'd love to set up some sites for ipv6.domain.com via 6to4
as a phase one, and at some
On 29 Mar 2011, at 00:18, Wil Schultz wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
A couple of concerns that come to mind are:
1) www.domain.com and ipv6.domain.com are serving the exact same content.
Typical SEO standards are to only
On Mar 29, 2011, at 3:51 AM, Franck Martin wrote:
On 3/29/11 10:18 , Wil Schultz wschu...@bsdboy.com wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
3) ??? Any others that I haven't thought of ???
So basically I'd love to set up some
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 15:18:30 -0700
Wil Schultz wschu...@bsdboy.com wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of
testing ipv6 out.
A couple of concerns that come to mind are:
1) www.domain.com and ipv6.domain.com are serving the exact same
content. Typical SEO
On Mar 28, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
A couple of concerns that come to mind are:
1) www.domain.com and ipv6.domain.com are serving the exact same content.
Typical SEO standards are to only
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 15:55 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
If you're worried about SEO, go with native IPv6 and then deploy s
for WWW.domain.foo.
Why is native IPv6 needed? I'd have thought a tunnel would be fine, too.
Regards, K.
--
Why is native IPv6 needed? I'd have thought a tunnel would be fine, too.
I believe the concern is that the higher latency of a tunnel would impact SEO
rankings.
On Mar 28, 2011, at 7:10 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 15:55 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
If you're worried about SEO, go with native IPv6 and then deploy s
for WWW.domain.foo.
Why is native IPv6 needed? I'd have thought a tunnel would be fine, too.
So why does
www A
On Mar 28, 2011, at 7:17 PM, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
Why is native IPv6 needed? I'd have thought a tunnel would be fine, too.
I believe the concern is that the higher latency of a tunnel would impact SEO
rankings.
True but you live with what you can get acces to ;-)
Tom
On Mar 28, 2011, at 3:55 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
On Mar 28, 2011, at 3:18 PM, Wil Schultz wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
A couple of concerns that come to mind are:
1) www.domain.com and ipv6.domain.com are serving the exact
I would be getting ipv6 connectivity, adding an unknown record
such as ipv6 or www6; but not www, and do as many comparative ipv4 vs
ipv6 tracerouts from as many route servers as possible. Then you will
have the data you need to actually make an informed decision rather
than just guessing how
I would be getting ipv6 connectivity, adding an unknown record such as
ipv6 or www6; but not www, and do as many comparative ipv4 vs
ipv6 tracerouts from as many route servers as possible. Then you will have the
data you need to actually make an informed decision rather than just guessing
Why do you even need a record to do that? Just do a traceroute to the
v6 address. The temporary record seems to do nothing useful in your
proposed procedure.
Easiest hack to test site usability: Modify your hosts file. Don't even
publish the record in DNS until you're ready.
On Mar 28, 2011, at 4:10 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 15:55 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
If you're worried about SEO, go with native IPv6 and then deploy s
for WWW.domain.foo.
Why is native IPv6 needed? I'd have thought a tunnel would be fine, too.
He was worried about the
On Mar 28, 2011, at 4:20 PM, TR Shaw wrote:
On Mar 28, 2011, at 7:10 PM, Karl Auer wrote:
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 15:55 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
If you're worried about SEO, go with native IPv6 and then deploy s
for WWW.domain.foo.
Why is native IPv6 needed? I'd have thought a
In a message written on Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 03:18:30PM -0700, Wil Schultz
wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
I don't run a web site where SEO is a top priority, so I don't track
such things.
Quite simply, who's crawling on IPv6? That
On Mar 28, 2011, at 9:50 PM, Leo Bicknell wrote:
In a message written on Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 03:18:30PM -0700, Wil Schultz
wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
I don't run a web site where SEO is a top priority, so I don't track
On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 5:18 PM, Wil Schultz wschu...@bsdboy.com wrote:
I'm attempting to find out information on the SEO implications of testing
ipv6 out.
A couple of concerns that come to mind are:
1) www.domain.com and ipv6.domain.com are serving the exact same content.
Typical SEO
On Mar 29, 2011, at 1:21 AM, Wil Schultz wrote:
So far the consensus is to run dual stack natively.
While this definitely is the way things should be set up in the end, I can
see some valid reasons to run ipv4 and ipv6 on separate domains for a while
before final configuration. For
23 matches
Mail list logo
