SEO Hosting is complete bullshit...

great thread! thanks + rep, lots of work into this one...

seo hosting is by far bs, and likely google could easily map out which ip ranges are being used by "seo hosts"

correct me if I'm wrong, but think I also heard that the nameservers end up being the same across all accounts?

much better to just buy a swack of shared accounts across different servers and find other creative ways to diversify your ip ranges....

while we're on the topic, when are ipv6 proxies going to really start hitting the market? or is nobody really up to spec on ipv6 yet?
 
Last edited:
Im glad you have posted this, I've had these thoughts about class C hosting for a while.

I'm pretty sure the default range for class C addresses is not as wide as you say though, I believe default class C block is:
Class C 192.0.1.1 to 223.255.254.254

And by default a class C network block is the first 3 octets so 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.2.1 are on separate class C networks right?

Also as I understand it, they are only default assignments, if hosting companies by a Class B/A network they can divide those into whatever blocks they wish using subnet mask.

I have been looking into this recently for a blog network, have been working on class B diversification and also ip owner diversification which I think would look much more natural to google...
 
Would you recommend putting more than 1 blog/site on the same IP? They wont be interlinking to each other, abut will be pointed to the same money site eventually.

The ideal model would be 1 IP per site, but thats going to cost quite alot.

Any suggestions? Whats the max number of site you can put per IP (to be safe)
 
Oh..

And I just forum an article with much better (no offense to OP) and illustrative explanation:

Code:
http://www.tech-faq.com/ip-address-classes.html

No offense taken, just understand that the linked article doesn't cover SEO hosting or Google and their tech. It is just about IP addresses from the perspective of a network engineer.

Class C IP addresses were used in small LAN configurations. They allow for approximately 2 million networks by using the first three octets of the address for the network identification. In a Class C address, the first three bits are fixed to 1 1 0. In the following three octets, 21 bits make up the network identification. The last octet then represents the host identification. This allows for 254 hosts per network. A Class C network number value starts at 192 and ends at 223.

What I covered with one important bit missing: they stopped being given out that way, 10 years ago.
 
great thread! thanks + rep, lots of work into this one...

seo hosting is by far bs, and likely google could easily map out which ip ranges are being used by "seo hosts"

correct me if I'm wrong, but think I also heard that the nameservers end up being the same across all accounts?

Not sure what your referring too, if you mean: if you use the name servers of the hosting company (be it a seo host or a normal hosting company) then yes. The key bit to remember is that with seo hosting name servers, you stand out like a sore thumb. With normal hosting name servers you blend in.


much better to just buy a swack of shared accounts across different servers and find other creative ways to diversify your ip ranges....

What I covered in my posts...

while we're on the topic, when are ipv6 proxies going to really start hitting the market? or is nobody really up to spec on ipv6 yet?

To me, it basically come's down to numbers: number of sites using IPV6 but more importantly number of end user ISP's deploying IPV6 to their end users. There have been methods developed which slowed down the depletion of IPV4 addresses (like not using classes to divide up the address range), nat, DHCP (when an IP address is not in use it can be given to a different machine for use). IPV4 to IPV6 proxies. Which have result in there not being an emergency to move over, so it will just take a long time.

Baring all of the above, the biggest reason is: cost.
 
so whats the solution, are there any genuine SEO hosting packages out there, this forum should be about finding solutions not problems.

if there is no such thing as genuine SEO hosting then what is the best alternative? Shall we not create a thread with a list of all the best low cost hosting solutions that will give us complete IP diversity, do we set up some kind of hosting sharing scheme?
 
Im glad you have posted this, I've had these thoughts about class C hosting for a while.

I'm pretty sure the default range for class C addresses is not as wide as you say though, I believe default class C block is:
Class C 192.0.1.1 to 223.255.254.254

192.0.1.1 in binary is: 11000000.00000000.00000001.00000001

223.255.254.254 in binary is: 11011111.11111111.11111110.11111110

You basically miss out the 192.0.0.x address range and the 223.255.255.x address range - if that were the case - which it isn't. You don't have to belive me, you can do a search for:
Classful network​
or
Classful addressing​

All the IP addresses are usable, it just depends on the situation - for example, the following is the Private Address Space (the non-routable IP address usually used behind NAT):

10.0.0.0 - 10.255.255.255
172.16.0.0 - 172.31.255.255
192.168.0.0 - 192.168.255.255

What shouldn't be used is the 0 and 255 of the host part (in the last octet) as it is bad form and usually reserved for other uses by routers - by the network admins.

And by default a class C network block is the first 3 octets so 192.168.1.1 and 192.168.2.1 are on separate class C networks right?

In your example (using a non-routable IP address range): yes.


Also as I understand it, they are only default assignments, if hosting companies by a Class B/A network they can divide those into whatever blocks they wish using subnet mask.
Do you mean buy (see blue bit in your quote), because IP addresses are asigned, if you could just buy them, then we would have run out years ago.

I have been looking into this recently for a blog network, have been working on class B diversification and also ip owner diversification which I think would look much more natural to google...

Class diversification is irrelevant, what you want is BGP and AS diversification.

In it's simplest form: hosting in different separate networks by different providers, as I listed. Or "ip owner diversification" as you put it.
 
Last edited:
so whats the solution, are there any genuine SEO hosting packages out there, this forum should be about finding solutions not problems.

if there is no such thing as genuine SEO hosting then what is the best alternative? Shall we not create a thread with a list of all the best low cost hosting solutions that will give us complete IP diversity, do we set up some kind of hosting sharing scheme?

I bet you a Jr. VIP membership - that you haven't read any of my posts. Because if you had, you would have seen that I not only point out the massive holes in SEO hosting (the problems).

I also point out how to do it the way it is sold but not actually delivered. And then how to practically implement it (the solution), using cheap shared hosting. If you need to do it on dedicated servers or VPS hosting, the principle is the same - just more costly.
 
Amazing thread, rep given. I guess we should just go for different hosts for our networks.
 
Would you recommend putting more than 1 blog/site on the same IP? They wont be interlinking to each other, abut will be pointed to the same money site eventually.

If it doesn't pass the: "does it look natural" test, then it may need to be on it's own IP address. However, considering that shared hosting is the ?cram them in, sell it low? of the hosting world. It's not uncommon to hear about servers being loaded with 4000 clients - each. For clustered shared hosting (like media temple's grid hosting), where ten's of thousands of clients can be on a single cluster, operating through just 1 or 2 IP addresses. Then it may not really matter.

You need to take into account, not only the network part, and the whois part - but I've not seen anyone talk about the on page part: like the contact details on the contact page and privacy policy (if it has a section for it).

It all needs to be consistent.

The ideal model would be 1 IP per site, but thats going to cost quite alot.

Any suggestions? Whats the max number of site you can put per IP (to be safe)
See the test question above...
 
I bet you a Jr. VIP membership - that you haven't read any of my posts. Because if you had, you would have seen that I not only point out the massive holes in SEO hosting (the problems).

I also point out how to do it the way it is sold but not actually delivered. And then how to practically implement it (the solution), using cheap shared hosting. If you need to do it on dedicated servers or VPS hosting, the principle is the same - just more costly.

I read all your posts, I just didnt understand them.
 
ok so I have been thinking about starting my own private blog network and building it up over the next 3+ years or so. It would ideally consist of 200+ sites all with quality content, no spun shit. What would be the best way to host something like this?

I can get hosting for around $3 per month so x 200 that would cost $600 per month which is not too bad but then I would need to find 200 hosting companies, which i am sure there are that many available but managing them becomes a pain.

sorry if you have covered this above but its a bit too tech for me.
 
ok so I have been thinking about starting my own private blog network and building it up over the next 3+ years or so. It would ideally consist of 200+ sites all with quality content, no spun shit. What would be the best way to host something like this?

I can get hosting for around $3 per month so x 200 that would cost $600 per month which is not too bad but then I would need to find 200 hosting companies, which i am sure there are that many available but managing them becomes a pain.

sorry if you have covered this above but its a bit too tech for me.


It would be a lot to manage that many hosting accounts.

The question is: do they all need to be on separate ip/hosting accounts.

Lets say they all link to the same place, e.g. a money page. Ideally it would look natural, if all the links came from all over the place. But if you look at reality, you'll find that there are going to be network locations (hosts), which host lots of sites that are all pointing to the same location.

A good example is internet marketers who recommend say: host gator, dream host etc. and those that do their hosting there. Those hosts have a ton of sites which are likely to be pointing at the same sites/pages.

Having a bunch of sites at big hosting company's will be natural, in the mix of thing. It may look un-natural if you don't.

So adding a few sites into those networks won?t make you stand out, but more likely blend in (depending on the ?niche?).

What I'm trying to get at is: if the sites need to be on different IP addresses/hosting accounts, because they will all link to the same location, you can minimise the amount of hosting accounts by using big shares hosting providers. You can use their popularity to your advantage. But you will still need a lot of accounts unless you are willing to risk just using a few big shared hosting providers. Some of them even give you different locations that your account will be located/hosted at. E.g. in the US, in the UK, in Canada etc - 1 host, 3 locations).


Personally I prefer the next option:

If all the sites in the blog network are not going to be linking to the same end location, but a group of them will be linking to say one money page and another group will be linking to a different money page and other groups to other money pages. For example 10 groups of sites which cover say 10 different topics.

If it's something like that, then you would only need say: 20 hosting accounts (for 200 sites, divided into 10 groups), where you randomly add sites to and link to the money pages as needed. This is more a: don?t put all you?r egg?s in one basket, in both: markets you are targeting (multiple markets vs just 1) and revenue protection (if a host goes down, you only lose a small portion of the network - not the whole thing).

You spread the 10 groups over the 20 accounts and your done. If the groups don't mix, then there is no real need to have each site with it's own IP address/hosting account. Instead you can share hosting accounts, having just 1 site from each group, per hosting account.

It's getting late, so I'll wrap it up here. If I'm not clear - please let me know...
 
Last edited:
thankyou for the thread,
never looked at seo hostting before, but certainly wont be considering after reading this
 
This is really interesting...I'm going to have to experiment with this and if it works out, it will save me quite a bit of money.
 
It would be a lot to manage that many hosting accounts.

The question is: do they all need to be on separate ip/hosting accounts.

Lets say they all link to the same place, e.g. a money page. Ideally it would look natural, if all the links came from all over the place. But if you look at reality, you'll find that there are going to be network locations (hosts), which host lots of sites that are all pointing to the same location.

A good example is internet marketers who recommend say: host gator, dream host etc. and those that do their hosting there. Those hosts have a ton of sites which are likely to be pointing at the same sites/pages.

Having a bunch of sites at big hosting company's will be natural, in the mix of thing. It may look un-natural if you don't.

So adding a few sites into those networks won?t make you stand out, but more likely blend in (depending on the ?niche?).

What I'm trying to get at is: if the sites need to be on different IP addresses/hosting accounts, because they will all link to the same location, you can minimise the amount of hosting accounts by using big shares hosting providers. You can use their popularity to your advantage. But you will still need a lot of accounts unless you are willing to risk just using a few big shared hosting providers. Some of them even give you different locations that your account will be located/hosted at. E.g. in the US, in the UK, in Canada etc - 1 host, 3 locations).


Personally I prefer the next option:

If all the sites in the blog network are not going to be linking to the same end location, but a group of them will be linking to say one money page and another group will be linking to a different money page and other groups to other money pages. For example 10 groups of sites which cover say 10 different topics.

If it's something like that, then you would only need say: 20 hosting accounts (for 200 sites, divided into 10 groups), where you randomly add sites to and link to the money pages as needed. This is more a: don?t put all you?r egg?s in one basket, in both: markets you are targeting (multiple markets vs just 1) and revenue protection (if a host goes down, you only lose a small portion of the network - not the whole thing).

You spread the 10 groups over the 20 accounts and your done. If the groups don't mix, then there is no real need to have each site with it's own IP address/hosting account. Instead you can share hosting accounts, having just 1 site from each group, per hosting account.

It's getting late, so I'll wrap it up here. If I'm not clear - please let me know...

Thanks for the advice it makes perfect sense and that the second option of 200 sites across 20 hosts is how I'm going to build it.
 
You can take it a step further (in reference to my last post - post 34), and have the "money pages" on different hosting accounts - which none of the group sites host on. If your money pages are affiliate links to products/services/etc. being sold by others. The money page hosting is taken care of, for you. So all you have to spend money on, is the group hosting.


Here's something to think about.
Do all sites stay put over their lifetime?​
As in: do they keep the same hosting account forever or is it natural for changes to take place over the years?​
 
I've just started a new thread to see if there is any interest in setting up a hosting coop. To help everyone save: time, money and effort.

See: SEO Hosting Coop...
 
Back
Top