Oh hang about, hadn’t seen the start of the second URL.. That’s, er.. that’s just wrong.
3. John Mueller | November 22nd 2008 @ 3:22 pm
Well, the URL works (wildcard DNS + no host header checks on the server - it even works with the IP address) and has links, so it would be something that we could index. It’s shown with &filter=0 to me, so it wouldn’t generally show up in the results next to the other URL.
The proper solution would be for the server to either 301 redirect to the preferred version or just not use wildcard DNS (make this URL invalid).
4. g1smd | December 10th 2008 @ 12:24 am
Not so much Google indexing errors, but schoolboy implementation errors by the Server-Admin of the site involved then…
Firewall Script I'm going to do a full write up on this, but I have been testing this out on a blog, that's been hacked and DDOS a few times over the last 6 months, why do people feel I want to host their Malware, why don't I just update WP time and effort I guess
Anyway I had been looking for a solution that i can install on a shared box that that I didn't have root access on.
Anyway My test is coming to an end, and I going to try and score a deal on a multiple domain license, or even try and buy a lump of the company lol
4 Comments | Leave a comment »
Could it be the way tjoos has it’s mod_rewrite set up? Like this:
http://www.aboutus.org/DavidNaylor.co.uk
Oh hang about, hadn’t seen the start of the second URL.. That’s, er.. that’s just wrong.
Well, the URL works (wildcard DNS + no host header checks on the server - it even works with the IP address) and has links, so it would be something that we could index. It’s shown with &filter=0 to me, so it wouldn’t generally show up in the results next to the other URL.
The proper solution would be for the server to either 301 redirect to the preferred version or just not use wildcard DNS (make this URL invalid).
Not so much Google indexing errors, but schoolboy implementation errors by the Server-Admin of the site involved then…