Kong Mesh Reviews

Name: Kong Mesh
Brand: Kong
Rating: 3.0 (1 reviews)

Vendor: Kong

3.0 out of 5

1 review
0% willing to recommend

What is Kong Mesh?

Kong Mesh is the ultimate universal service mesh designed for enterprise organizations, offering simplicity and scalability with Kuma and Envoy technologies. This cloud-native solution is versatile, deployable on Kubernetes, VMware, and various environments. Kong Mesh excels in ease of installation, configuration, and management, making it a top choice for organizations seeking streamlined service mesh implementation. With robust features like fine-grained traffic control, observability tools for in-depth monitoring, and comprehensive security mechanisms such as authentication and encryption, Kong Mesh ensures that microservices are both secure and high-performing. Its multi-zone and multi-mesh support allow for distributed deployments, making it a flexible and powerful choice for those looking to enhance their service infrastructure.

Get the Service Mesh Buyer's Guide and find out what your peers are saying about Kong Mesh, HAProxy, Istio and more!

Kong Mesh is the #3 ranked solution in top Service Mesh solutions. PeerSpot users give Kong Mesh an average rating of 6.0 out of 10. Kong Mesh is most commonly compared to HAProxy: Kong Mesh vs HAProxy. Kong Mesh is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 71% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a financial services firm, accounting for 22% of all views.

Buyer's Guide

Service Mesh

July 2025

Get the category report

Helped 864,155 peers since 2012

Kong Mesh mindshare

As of August 2025, the mindshare of Kong Mesh in the Service Mesh category stands at 18.7%, up from 13.5% compared to the previous year, according to calculations based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Service Mesh

Key learnings from peers

Valuable Features

"It is a scalable product."

Room for Improvement

"The initial setup is complicated. Although Kuma has its own CLI, CTL, and they say to use their CLI, if I have to build a generic solution, my personal preference would be to use Helm or another similar solution other than Kuma. If you have your own library CLI, it becomes hard for others to adopt it. For example, if I have to write some automation, infrastructure automation, I can't just use Kuma. I have to change my code to use Kuma's CTL, which is unfair because it doesn't make sense. It doesn't fit with my current automation structure. I have to do something extra, something additional, which I really don't like."