last data update: 2011/10/14, 11:24

Website loading time

during the test: 1.46 s

cable connection (average): 1.56 s

DSL connection (average): 1.67 s

modem (average): 7.09 s

HTTP headers

Information about DNS servers

protector.noA81.167.194.68IN60
protector.noMX5mail.protector.noIN60
protector.noSOAns-foo.linpro.nethostmaster.linpro.no201110170510800 3600 2419200 600 IN 60
protector.noNSns-bar.linpro.netIN60
protector.noNSns-foo.linpro.netIN60
protector.noNSns-zoo.linpro.netIN60

Received from the first DNS server

Request to the server "protector.no"
You used the following DNS server:
DNS Name: ns-bar.linpro.net
DNS Server Address: 213.186.49.244#53
DNS server aliases:

HEADER opcode: REQUEST, status: NOERROR, id: 14337
flag: qr aa rd REQUEST: 1, ANSWER: 6, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

REQUEST SECTION:
protector.no. IN ANY

ANSWER SECTION:
protector.no. 60 IN SOA ns-foo.linpro.net. hostmaster.linpro.no. 2011101705 10800 3600 2419200 600
protector.no. 60 IN A 81.167.194.68
protector.no. 60 IN MX 5 mail.protector.no.
protector.no. 60 IN NS ns-bar.linpro.net.
protector.no. 60 IN NS ns-foo.linpro.net.
protector.no. 60 IN NS ns-zoo.linpro.net.

SECTION NOTES:
mail.protector.no. 60 IN A 81.167.194.67

Received 210 bytes from address 213.186.49.244#53 in 103 ms

Received from the second DNS server

Request to the server "protector.no"
You used the following DNS server:
DNS Name: ns-foo.linpro.net
DNS Server Address: 87.238.32.254#53
DNS server aliases:

HEADER opcode: REQUEST, status: NOERROR, id: 48571
flag: qr aa rd REQUEST: 1, ANSWER: 6, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

REQUEST SECTION:
protector.no. IN ANY

ANSWER SECTION:
protector.no. 60 IN SOA ns-foo.linpro.net. hostmaster.linpro.no. 2011101705 10800 3600 2419200 600
protector.no. 60 IN NS ns-zoo.linpro.net.
protector.no. 60 IN NS ns-bar.linpro.net.
protector.no. 60 IN NS ns-foo.linpro.net.
protector.no. 60 IN MX 5 mail.protector.no.
protector.no. 60 IN A 81.167.194.68

SECTION NOTES:
mail.protector.no. 60 IN A 81.167.194.67

Received 210 bytes from address 87.238.32.254#53 in 108 ms

Subdomains (the first 50)

Typos (misspells)

orotector.no
lrotector.no
-rotector.no
0rotector.no
peotector.no
pdotector.no
pfotector.no
ptotector.no
p5otector.no
p4otector.no
pritector.no
prktector.no
prltector.no
prptector.no
pr0tector.no
pr9tector.no
prorector.no
profector.no
progector.no
proyector.no
pro6ector.no
pro5ector.no
protwctor.no
protsctor.no
protdctor.no
protrctor.no
prot4ctor.no
prot3ctor.no
protextor.no
protevtor.no
proteftor.no
protedtor.no
protecror.no
protecfor.no
protecgor.no
protecyor.no
protec6or.no
protec5or.no
protectir.no
protectkr.no
protectlr.no
protectpr.no
protect0r.no
protect9r.no
protectoe.no
protectod.no
protectof.no
protectot.no
protecto5.no
protecto4.no
rotector.no
potector.no
prtector.no
proector.no
protctor.no
protetor.no
protecor.no
protectr.no
protecto.no
rpotector.no
portector.no
prtoector.no
proetctor.no
protcetor.no
protetcor.no
protecotr.no
protectro.no
pprotector.no
prrotector.no
prootector.no
prottector.no
proteector.no
protecctor.no
protecttor.no
protectoor.no
protectorr.no

Location

IP: 81.167.194.66

continent: EU, country: Norway (NOR), city: Lier

Website value

rank in the traffic statistics: -

There is not enough data to estimate website value.

Basic information

website build using CSS

code weight: 39.4 KB

text per all code ratio: 22 %

title: Protector AS

description:

keywords:

encoding: utf-8

language: en-gb

Website code analysis

one word phrases repeated minimum three times

PhraseQuantity
the5
and5
this3

two word phrases repeated minimum three times

three word phrases repeated minimum three times

B tags

U tags

I tags

images

file namealternative text
- Protector AS
Decrease font size
Reset font size to default
Increase font size
MSCP before repair
Bjørnekollen BRL
Members of the NTSB examine the collapsed section of the I-35W bridge spanning the Mississippi River near downtown Minneapolis. New technologies are available to monitor the state of bridges, but experts say states have moved slowly to adopt such equipment because the extra expense has not yet proven cost effective.

headers

H1

H2

H3

H4

H5

H6

internal links

addressanchor text
- Protector AS
Home
Contact Us
Sitemap
Links
English
About Protector
Contact us
References
Car Parks
Advanced Search
Rebar Corrosion
Reports and papers
Media
Products
Cathodic Protection
Tech Data
Manuals
Monitoring
Tech Data
Manuals
Materials
Tech Data
MSDS
MSDS ECOonline
All downloads
Shop
Package tracking
Currency Converter
Decrease font size
Reset font size to default
Increase font size
About Protector
Rebar Corrosion
Products
Shop
MSCP before repair
Bjørnekollen BRL
CASSETTE CP system
video
2
Next
End
registering

external links

addressanchor text
Home
Home
here
Members of the NTSB examine the collapsed section of the I-35W bridge spanning the Mississippi River near downtown Minneapolis. New technologies are available to monitor the state of bridges, but experts say states have moved slowly to adopt such equipment because the extra expense has not yet proven cost effective.
Alan Levin
This article