Amazon API Gateway Reviews

I use AWS API Management and Mulesoft because I work on different solutions and I am in a different layer, because I most focused on backend solutions. I have participated in some projects using these tools but I am not a developer or an expert.

We have designed and implemented RESTful API's. For example, based on Microservices with Spring Boot and AKS or OpenShift.

In terms of the most valuable features, it would say that it is really easy to start working with it.

I'm fine with the interface. It's okay. I think it also is really useful with the pay per-use. The cost is interesting.

It would be useful to have a more complete development environment for the developer, with different integrative capabilities to manage all the life cycles for the API. I think the full version formula for that is really useful. They should improve the development environment for easier integration.

I have been using Amazon API Gateway for about one year.

It is stable. I haven't find many issues in the program, so I think it's a stable.

We have many teams working on the solution, between 10 and 50, and there are between 8 and 10 people per team.

The initial setup is easy because you don't have to install anything. It's cloud. It is in a base mode, so to start working with that the setup is really easy.

I was looking for information regarding AWS API gateway and MuleSoft because I am looking for some different arguments to put on the table for a comparative for a customer. In my opinion MuleSoft is a tool that lets you to manage all the life cycles for the API. I think it's a more complete solution. In AWS you don't have the capabilities to manage all the life cycle for the API's. Also you don't have other capabilities for implementing different integration patterns. I think that's the main difference that I found between these tools.

The advice that I would give others regarding Amazon API is that it depends on the use cases. If they have a complex environment, they need to consider different integration patterns. It could be that AWS Management is not enough for them. They would have to compliment it with another solution. It is really working in some cases, but you do need to evaluate all the requirements to choose the tool. If you are working only in the AWS context with different services or something like that, it's really useful to work with AWS Management.

On a scale of one to ten I would rate Amazon API Gateway an eight.

We are currently using this solution in a project that we are implementing for a public service organization. It is a content management system that will be able to do things like rate monitoring. The service will have good security and availability.

This is a cloud-based deployment with Lambda Integration.

This solution gives you end-to-end protection in what you're able to do. This includes a certificate base, TLS from endpoints, and you can protect the whole link. It will generate certificate keys for you.

This solution gives you a unified way to have your API accessed.

It's a managed product and is fully scalable.

This solution ties in very well with all of the AWS services, such as IAM and asset management. It gives you security from an authentication and authorization point of view.

Lambda integration and functionality is very good.

This solution ties directly in with the AWS firewall, which gives you a lot of security, including application security in terms of things like SQL injection and cross-site scripting.

One of the problems with using this solution is that you have to know a lot about the Amazon ecosystem, in terms of services, to be able to use it. For example, if you use it without the Web Application Firewall then you're going to get some attacks. You have to read the documentation and learn how to use it.

This is a very large product, which means that there is a lot to learn and a lot of documentation to read.

It is not clear to us how you create a direct connection between your on-premises network and the API gateway. In the documentation, it tells you to create a VPN, but I find this troubling at the application level. You should be able to use MTLS. This is what you want rather than direct connect because of security issues. I don't think that this is a documentation issue. Rather, I think that it is a feature that can be improved.

This solution is stable. We will not know for sure until we get into production, but our tests show that stability is fine.

The scalability is excellent, given that it is AWS and not a third-party solution.

We have not fully deployed yet, so we have not had to scale, but scalability is well documented.

I have not contacted technical support personally. Some of my colleagues have, but not about this solution specifically. We do have people that speak with Amazon at times.

The setup of this solution is well documented and examples are provided. I won't say that it is very easy, but you can do it. There are some things that involve creating custom rules, which is not easy. I'm not sure if it can be made easier or not.

We have a good team to handle the implemenation and deployment. Most of our people are pretty technical.

This solution does more for you than a product like Kong.

I have heard complaints that people say this product does not have good security, but that is not true. There is an expectation that you can use it with other Amazon services to provide security, as well as other functionality.

This is a great product. It has ease of use and a full breadth of functionality. I would say that the Amazon platform, in my view, is the best compared to third-party products.

The only real problem is that you have to know a lot about what is outside of the API gateway in order to make the best use of it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use this solution for mobile app development. It is the API gateway for my backend.

The most valuable feature is the ease of managing the gateway.

This solution is useful for making new APIs. We deploy with CloudFormation, so it's pretty easy to use.

The way they manage the headers could be improved and made easier.

There are some certificates that they will not let us use.

I would like to see the web console improved.

There should be more videos and documentation about the new features that are released every month.

This solution is very stable.

It is a scalable solution. We have ten users in my team who service approximately five thousand people through our apps, and we are increasing the usage every day.

We have a solution architect from AWS and he is working with us. The support from Amazon is great. On a scale of one to five, I would rate technical support a five.

We did not use another cloud solution prior to this one. However, we did use an on-premises API gateway from CA Technologies. It is a very capable solution, but it is more expensive and we also had to maintain it ourselves. It is not a managed service like the API gateway from AWS.

The initial setup of this solution is very easy. It only takes a few minutes.

This solution is a managed service, so we don't need to be concerned with maintenance. AWS does the management and scaling for us. It's serverless.

I took care of the deployment myself.

We have seen ROI. It's pay-per-use, so you won't lose any money.

This is a pay-per-use service, where you only pay for what you use.

We had our on-premises solution, and we also evaluated Apigee from Google. Ultimately, we felt that AWS, for our use case, was the best option. The main reasons are the ease of use and pricing.

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to first read the documentation and follow the steps. Make a use case, create a proof of concept, and then migrate it to production environments. It's pretty easy to use.

This is a good product, but there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for providing controlled access to our services running within Amazon.

You can code anything and hook it on to it but it doesn't give you stuff out of the box like the other gateways give you. You can do anything with it because you just attach a LAN to it and it will do anything, but that's to the custodian. You know you're not using the power of the gateway. It's hard to configure. There's a lot of options but it's very hard, it's very confusing.

In the future, I'd like to see Amazon develop a portal and monetization that is not only for the Amazon Marketplace.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is very easily scalable.

The technical support is very strong. We've had issues with the solution and configuration and we've gotten very good support.

We used something else, but Amazon is more powerful. We moved to the cloud.

I didn't do the initial setup, so I'm not sure how hard it was to implement, or how long deployment took. Right now, we have two DevOps people handling the maintenance.

We didn't evaluate any other options before choosing this current solution.

I would rate this solution a five out of 10. If there was a better configuration, I'd give it a higher score.

We primarily use this solution for exposing internal data sources to the internet.

The ability to proxy has been the most valuable feature.

The pricing could be better. Also, possibly better technical support services or possibly just more documentation to assist users.

The scalability is very good. We plan to slowly increase usage. We have a number of things we need to do with it. It won't grow substantially, but maybe to double what we've done so far.

Like most Amazon services, and this one's the same, you're expected to effectively do your own support, and any other support is by emails, so it's quite limited.

We didn't previously use a different solution.

The initial setup is pretty easy. Deployment only takes five minutes.

We are an integrator, so we did the implementation ourselves.

We've not yet directly seen any ROI, but we weren't expecting to.

The pricing can always get better, but it's pretty reasonable and it's a pay as you go model.

We evaluated Dell Boomi and we looked at Informatica.

The user interface is easy enough to use. I don't really have any complaints about it. In terms of advice for implementing and using, I would say you should make sure you've got good internal skills.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.