sitecheck.internetseer

[Marcia]

Just caught this for the first time:

198.139.155.32 - - [18/Aug/2001:02:46:43 -0400] "HEAD / HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "-" "sitecheck.internetseer.com"
198.139.155.32 - - [18/Aug/2001:02:46:43 -0400] "HEAD / HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "-" "sitecheck.internetseer.com"
198.139.155.32 - - [18/Aug/2001:02:46:43 -0400] "HEAD /index.html HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "-" "sitecheck

then:

198.139.155.32 - - [18/Aug/2001:03:46:00 -0400] "HEAD / HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "-" "sitecheck.internetseer.com"
198.139.155.32 - - [18/Aug/2001:03:46:00 -0400] "HEAD / HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "-" "sitecheck.internetseer.com"
198.139.155.32 - - [18/Aug/2001:03:46:00 -0400] "HEAD /index.html HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "-" "sitecheck.internetseer.com"

They're supposed to be checking for site downtimes according to their site, and have instructions for robots.txt, but they did not ask for robots.txt

Leave them alone and see how often they hit, or exclude them?

[engine]

Their site check facility will be back regularly. They could have you on a free uptime check facility, in which case you should get an e-mail advising you uptime.

[FreeBee]

Marcia, their site explains most of it but there's no evidence that the bot calls for robots.txt. Comes through every 2 hours or so, this is what we get:

198.139.155.7 - - [18/Aug/2001:02:41:52 -0600] "HEAD / HTTP/1.1" 200 0 "-" "InternetSeer.com"

From one of our logs:
[17/Aug/2001:03:22:53 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:05:35:54 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:07:15:57 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:09:12:59 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:11:32:14 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:13:01:14 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:14:58:49 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:17:10:20 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:18:43:01 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:20:46:35 -0600]
[17/Aug/2001:22:50:02 -0600]
[18/Aug/2001:00:34:33 -0600]
[18/Aug/2001:02:41:52 -0600]

[Woz]

Internet Seer, as engine says, is a free site uptime onitoring service with a weekly report on uptime and connection time. Included in the report is of course advertising which is how they make their money.

They have a connection, how firm I don't know, with Claymont.com, and when you submit to the SE you are "given" the free service.

<quote>
In order to ensure the integrity of our search results, Claymont.com remotely monitors every Web site that is registered at Claymont.com. This allows Claymont.com to keep its search results accurate by removing non-responding Web sites from its directory.

Claymont.com has joined with InternetSeer.com to conduct this ongoing monitoring. As part of this service, InternetSeer will monitor your Web site every hour, 24-7, and will notify you by email when your site is not responding. In addition, InternetSeer will send you weekly reports displaying the performance of your Web site over the previous week. There is NO CHARGE for this service.

</quote>

So if you have submitted lately that is probably how you got the service.

I don't mind it myself as it gives me ammunition if ever I have any dissagreement with my host re uptime and connect time. Some may question their ethics or signing you up as a condition of submitting to Claymont, but then I guess it is no different than Googlebot visiting us, just more frequent.

Perhaps we need an new "Internet Seer Dance" a la the Googlebot Fling...

Onya
Woz

[Marcia]

I never did submit before, but I just did, and announced it on an email list. I don't know how they found me. Their listings aren't very impressive. I once had one of those monitoring services that ended up being discontinued. It was very handy.

Thanks.

[Woz]

>Their listings aren't very impressive.

Yeah, the temptation is not to submit to SEDs that seem not to be worth the time. But my thought is that the up-and-coming SEDs won't up-and-come unless we spend some time giving them information to return to their inquirers. Kind of like not bighting the hand that may one day feed us. But then, that is a thought for another thread sometime...

Onya
Woz

[toolman]

I find internetseer to be very irritating...especially since I never signed up for it. They get nothing but 403's from me now.

[lawman]

I signed up for service from Internetseer. They are free (so far) and do a good job (so far). Can't speak to the irritation factor except to say that so far I'm not irritated.

Lawman

[contact99]

I use their service and I think it's great...it's free.