What is our primary use case?
I use it as a gateway for our APIs. We have several hundred APIs here, so we use Kong Gateway Enterprise to manage and monitor them. In this application platform, we prefer to use the Kong Enterprise UI instead of the Kong Community Edition GUI.
What is most valuable?
We use both authorization and header-based methods. Additionally, we connect with our identity provider (IdP) using single sign-on (SSO) and OAuth 2.0. We also enable OpenID Connect.
The traffic control capabilities in Kong Gateway are effective. It helps me manage the usage of each API and monitor any anomalies. I can see any strange behavior or illegal usage from developers, which allows me to notify management about potential issues. Sometimes, it might just be a typo or a bug in the application, but other times, it could be something more serious. The Kong Gateway's traffic control helps detect these anomalies in usage.
What needs improvement?
The main challenge, in my opinion, is the price. It's difficult to convince our management to approve the budget to purchase it from our vendor. There are no technical problems.
It's expensive in Thailand (10 million baht, in Thai currency).
One thing I've seen in a competitor's product is the ability to create a simple API within their platform using a low-code/no-code GUI. It connects to databases and allows you to drag and drop to create basic API functions. I think this feature would be a valuable addition to Kong Gateway Enterprise.
So, they should create a single API for the platform.
Moreover, if Kong Gateway Enterprise could integrate AI, that would be great. It could automatically scale itself, assess request rates for each API, or even detect attacks. That would be great.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using it for one and a half years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Kong Gateway helped to improve performance. It's good enough for our users.
I would rate the availability an eight out of ten, we experienced some hiccups.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
It's very easy to scale and create another adapter.
I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. We around thousands of end users using it.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
Kong is my first API gateway.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup had moderate complexity. You have to know a lot of things.
I would rate my experience with the initial setup a five out of ten, with ten being easy.
The Community Edition requires a lot of technical knowledge to implement and use. It's okay for me, but you need to know a lot about Linux, Docker, and networking.
- Deployment time: From scratch, it took about three months.
- Deployment process: The main thing is the configuration and combining it with our existing APIs. Adding them one by one is the most tedious part.
What about the implementation team?
I implemented it. I deploy it in Docker and use it with my team.
What was our ROI?
It helps us mitigate the time to detect problems since we can look up the monitoring system and logs very easily.
It's free for the community edition.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
It's expensive in Thailand.
As far as I know from one of our vendors, it's about 10 million baht per year.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
I'm comparing Kong Gateway Enterprise with other software for potential use in our enterprise. We're looking at management, monitoring, and ease of use.
What other advice do I have?
I would recommend it because its performance is great. It's reliable.
Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
*Disclosure: My company does not have a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer.
