- From: Damien Bezborodow <damien.b@koalatelecom.com.au>
- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2007 10:12:13 +0930
- To: www-talk@w3.org
Harry Maugans wrote: > On 3/28/07, Tom Molesworth <tetra604@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I'd vote for 403 Forbidden. >> >> The 300 series is to indicate a change although the content is valid. >> 400-series errors generally indicate that the returned content is not >> what you were after in the first place. >> >> Most proxy servers will return 403 if the user is not authenticated. >> This is essentially the case here since permissions have been >> suspended. The 403 error is often taken by clients to say that there >> is a real problem that should be reported, rather than 302 etc. which >> would mean that the service itself has changed but probably still >> valid. >> > > I agree. From a search engine optimization standpoint, if you feed the > search engine a 302, it will start indexing the suspended page, replacing > the original content (causing you to lose your rankings). Whereas if you > send it a 4xx error, it will keep the last found page in it's cache, and > check back periodically to see if normal has been restored yet. > > Granted SEO might not be your intention, however the SEO standards side of > it does further support Tom's vote. > > Good luck! > But anything other than a 3xx message would require the proxy to serve the actual "suspension notice" page, not forward to it. It's just a question of how well Squid will support this. Might be able to implement it as a custom error page. Thanks, folks. -- _Damien Bezborodow_ Applications Programmer _Koala Telecom Pty Ltd_ Software Development 465 Morphett Street Adelaide, SA 5000 Australia
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2007 03:02:35 UTC