redirectpermanent for new ip?

old site still getting visitors

[amznVibe]

I've been watching an old site that we recently moved to new server space, and even after a week we are seeing a trickle of people still coming into the old site!

What's the best way to force those people with weird DNS caches to get to the new site? Both the old site and new site are on (different) shared IPs. I have read a few threads here on this topic and I am only left more confused than before.

Obviously I cannot redirect them to the same domain name
but have to send them to the new IP/~account?

is this valid?
redirectpermanent /domain.com/ [IP...]

Any help is greatly appreciated! -aV-

[DaveAtIFG]

You will probably see spiders at the old site for a while too. Some apparently update their DNS records infrequently. The consensus is that leaving the old site up until traffic drops off to nil is best for SEs/listings, usually 3-4 weeks max. Patience, not a redirect, is the best choice, since anything else you do will impact SEs.

Also, to learn a little more about your redirection options, take a look at this post [webmasterworld.com].

[amznVibe]

ah thank you for the advice, I will be patient then... your mini-faq for redirections was very good too... webmasterworld needs a quick link to a list of good FAQs that the moderators can add to, I have seen some real gems on here (and sometimes forget to bookmark em) -aV-

[DaveAtIFG]

We try to add the most useful posts to the Library [webmasterworld.com]. Unfortunately, that doesn't always happen but it's a good place to start lookin'! :) (FYI, using the Library link within a specific forum only returns Library posts within that forum.)

[jdMorgan]

is this valid?
redirectpermanent /domain.com/ [IP...]

If you mean

RedirectPermanent /domain.com http://12.34.56.78/~account

Then yes, that is valid. I've never had to do it myself, and I'd like to know if it solves your problem - We get a lot of posts about the problem you're having . Please post if you do try it and test it, successfully or otherwise.

Thanks,
Jim

[DaveAtIFG]

We get a lot of posts about the problem you're having

Jim, I considered this a few months back, we discussed it, and I never got back to ya, sorry!

After considerable thought, the fact that this was a client's site with good traffic, and having the option of keeping the old site in place for as long as necessary, I decided against it.

At that time, you suggested that spiders may index the IP, not the domain name and that got me thinking... If the site were virtually hosted, who knows where an SEs link to an IP would send them? If a site enjoyed good rankings due in part to a keyword rich domain name, indexing by IP would undermine those rankings. If a site used absolute addresses for internal linking (http*//www.domainname.com/somepage.html), it could throw a spider into a loop.

I've concluded that this is probably a very poor idea except in extreme circumstances. I don't have a "throw away" site that I'm willing to try it on! :)

[jdMorgan]

Dave,

Somehow I forgot the part about his shared IP address on the new host. So you're absolutely right: In this case, the request must include the domain name in order to resolve properly, so we cannot forward from the old server to the new server using only an IP address. I'm glad I've never had to deal with this aspect of low-cost hosting, and the difficulties it creates in moving a site - among other things. "One man, one vote - One domain, one IP" is what I say, even if I have to pay! :)

Jim

[amznVibe]

"One man, one vote - One domain, one IP" is what I say, even if I have to pay!

Um, wouldn't the web run out of IPs? I've seen this discussed in detail. Shared IPs seem to work quite well and keeps costs down. I think most places quote $5/month for a real IP so that's $60 a year saved. You can also do nice "tricks" like shared SSL when there are several smaller sites on one server, so that's another $50-$100 saved per year. -aV-