To Multi- IP or not to Multi IP - that is the question!

IS it really feasable to use ip checks in inbound links?

[netnerd]

Google i read in here has got a patent that allows them to look at the IPs of referring websites to establish if they are coming from different sources.

We have all heard the arguments that its unfair becuase of virtual hosting putting different sites on the same ips.

With the 'tightening up' of ip allocation , is it really feasible for google to ever use this technology to differentiate the quality of inbound links?

i.e. Do i need to ditch my dedicated server and move my sites to different ips?

[mcavic]

Do i need to ditch my dedicated server and move my sites to different ips?

You don't have to ditch the dedicated server - if your ISP will give you a block of IPs, you can plug that block in and run one site per IP. That way, nobody will know that they're on the same server.

[Gateway]

this has always been a question of mine, whether you get penalized for having multi sites on one ip. Some people use alot of vhosts and their ISP only gives them 1-2 ip's but im wondering if that causes any issues or is it better to put each site on a differnt ip?

[heini]

No you don't get penalized for having multiple sites on one IP. Of course not.

If however some filter gets triggered, and an inspection follows, than this is a factor which may come into play.

[netnerd]

But do links from the same IP have the same importance?

[netnerd]

Also, what about getting dif nameservers for sites?

Is that a good idea or not necessary?

[MrSpeed]

IMHO the concept that Google would judge the quality of a link by IP is total nonsense fueled by PR paranoia. It falls into the same category as checking the whois information.

If someone is concerned about it there are a million hosts willing to sell you virtual accounts with unlimited domains for less that $10/month.

[netnerd]

why would they get a patent passed to do it then?

[killroy]

I think multiple IPs are ONLY an issue if you're a professional spammer and INTEND on violating Google TSO and need to hide the source of certain sites. For most legit sites, I wouldn't worry that it influences linking weights.

PS: No offense so professional spammers, it's a busienss like any other as far as I'm concerned and needs it's own set of skills, and a lot of it to. Respect.

SN

[mcavic]

what about getting dif nameservers for sites?

Nah, not necessary. A small or medium sized hosting company will have all of their customers on the same name servers.

I think multiple IPs are ONLY an issue if you're a professional spammer and INTEND on violating Google TSO and need to hide the source of certain sites.

I agree. I wouldn't share an IP with someone else, but I think it's fine for your sites to all be on one.

[dpplgngr]

IMHO the concept that Google would judge the quality of a link by IP is total nonsense fueled by PR paranoia. It falls into the same category as checking the whois information.

Yet Google is a major customer of the D-Tective Reverse Whois service.

What do you say to that?

[netnerd]

If I was google - i would definately look at whois records and ip addresses. Although its not conclusive evidence, it is a good indication that the same webmaster owns the same sites.

Now, that is not to question the relevance of these sites, however, it is a pointer that perhaps more investigation of the sites on this ip/whois is or may be required.

I hope this does not happen. Although i do have many releveant sites (all are relevant to the kw search terms they appear for), there may be some slight overlap in their content.

A ban of these sites would be a bad thing from a consumers point of view, and a much worse from my (bank balance) point of view!

[wkitty42]

one wonders if this may be part of the problem that some adsense folk are seeing that's causing G to close their accounts...