IBM Integration Bus Reviews

The IBM Integration Bus platform is Advanced Enterprise service bus , Typically used in SOA Environments . with newer version it can work it container based platforms and can be used to implement Micro services.

We have implemented IIB/WMB Based Solution in multiple organizations helping them to adopt Service oriented architecture , and eliminating point to point integrations.

IIB helped our clients having clean Overall solution , doing decoupling between different systems , eliminating duplicate point to point integration points . replacing legacy integration products ,and having high performing stable trouble free Enterprise service bus

IIB is feature rich product it is hard to point to a single feature , but most important is IIB supports most communication protocols out the box (SOAP/REST/HTTP/MQ/JMS/TCP/Files) 

Native support of Asynchronous calls .  support of multiple message formats (XML/JSON/ CWF/CSF/SWIFT/HL7....)

Global Transaction Co-ordination

Horizontal and Vertical Scalability .

It would be better with more API management features. 

More Micro-service and container based support. IBM is already working on it on Version 11, but it still needs improvement. 

Also IIB have cloud version ,it is doesn't have all features of the On premise version , and needs more improvement . 

IBM Integration Bus is almost perfect in terms of stability.

We can easily do the required scalability with IBM Integration Bus. We have never faced an issue. Plus, it is very straightforward.

I didn't need to contact IBM technical support very much.

In older versions, the setup was very complex. In recent releases, it's been very straightforward.

 I am working in a consultancy company. We install this for most of our clients. We develop services for them using it.

IIB very flexible.nearly limitless , You can easily overload it with duties that it's not meant to hold. Organizations needs to have strong their architecture team and SOA governance during and After implementation .to avoid overloading the ESB Layer.

I would give IBM Integration Bus an 11 out of 10. I have tried solutions from competitors Brands. There is no comparison.

My primary use case of this solution is for establishing an enterprise service between the orchestrated transactions of two different channels. This is the main purpose of this product.

There is a concept behind the project of this technology, the ESP technology, it is just the layer because of the bus between front systems and back systems, So if I want to change anything in the back system, no need to change in the front system, only this layer. So what do is, we make the integration of the system much, much easier and faster. So there is only  one layer to control the integration of the communication.

The resources about IBM are hard to find, and it is not enough material. Finding people who know this product is problematic.

The product is very stable. 

The scalability actually depends upon the number of users, channels and transactions per second. Horizontal it is hard to add more, but vertical is very easy.

Tech support is very good, but it takes time to resolve any issue.

I have prior experience with Oracle. The work bus and the the word map is totally different from Oracle.  In Oracle you're doing the job management most of the time, in IBM product, their version, it's much easier. You just try to sync with it and that's all. IBM is an easier product to use.

I also have prior experience with Microsoft, but that was in 2008. At that time, there were issues with integration

It is very straightforward. It is very user-friendly integration.

It is important to consider:

• API control
• Firewall security

I have no comment on pricing.

IBM recently changed the name of this solution to IBM API-Connect. With the new name, they have added two new features, such as connecting to the cloud. 

Our primary use case is a content-based tool for system messaging. IIB comes with IBM MQ as its messaging backbone. With respect to our requirements, IIB fits well, and it does its job.

It has improved our company a lot. We have added a lot of adapters. The microservice has provided an advantage for us, so we have a lot of adapters with REST Node.js, which have been added.

IBM used to provide multiple adapters. For example, we also have an adaptor for MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport). 

With respect to our enterprise and SOA compliance (this product fits within the SOA compliance category), we want to talk about microsolution architecture, as enterprises generally enable SOA first before going to microsolutions. It will have to have a long-term approach on the SOA category, as IIB fits with a lot of other IBM products, like the WSRR, IBM DataPower, and MQ. It has a lot of advantages when we are using it or enforcing SOA as an architecture for our enterprises.

IBM does not support orchestration, which is how they designed it, and other BPM tools in the market support orchestration. IIB wasn't designed for short and small transitions which are preferred to be stateless. If they merged the BPM capability into this product, then it would be a better solution.

It is one of the most stable products which I have seen in the market. 

It scalability is seamless. There should not be any issues as long as we integrate fully with our use cases and restrict scenarios that we have tested on different operating systems. We have tested for the high availability and OTS availability. It has worked well so far.

Under certain situations, when what we were expecting is not right, then we contact support, and technical support from IBM is really good. However, IBM support is mostly for the small time stuff, like product releases. In a few years, they will end up the support unless we pay them. The difference is in the cost. Support costs are high compared to their competition. Otherwise, the support is good.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We also evaluated Oracle.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10, because of: 

1. The community. 
2. They provide freeware.
3. The support that IBM provides. 
4. It fits its purpose.
   

IIB is one of the top-rated solution in this category. If looking for a tool which is SOA compliance, you can blindly go for this particular tool. 

The most important criteria when selecting a vendor is support. We are looking for the 24/7 support in respect to that particular product. It should be compliant within our business requirements. Technology is evolving day-by-day and should have an additional features added-on as long as we are required to implement those features, e.g. product security. We are using different encrypted algorithms on encryption screens, and these functionalities are widely adopted by IBM.

We have used IIB as a complete ESB solution with IBM MQ for various financial institutions. IIB supports various connectors, message formats, and transport protocols.

Its transformation language, ESQL, is easy to learn and use. Rich support of the mapping node (GUI mapping), JavaCompute Node, XSL, etc. make it useful and developer friendly.

IIB 10's primary features:

1. REST API design and development support out-of-the-box. OpenAPI compliant.
2. Lightweight run time, hence it is ideal for Docker/microservices implementation.
3. Several ways to admin using web interface, REST API admin capabilities, and console administration.
4. Long list of already built-in connectors for legacy systems (CICS, MQ, etc) and modern system connectors (Salesforce, LoopBack, etc.).
5. Long list of parsers (XMLNSC, DFDL, JSON, etc.).
6. Easy to understand documentation with a huge list of examples and tutorials.

• We were able to implement REST APIs quickly by using out-of-the-box support for design and implementation.
• IBM support is exceptionally competent and quick.
• It has been on the market for a long time, so getting skilled resources is convenient. Therefore, you will see your team growing and learning it quickly.
  

1. REST API design and development support are useful. Building and exposing APIs using GUI API designer with editor makes implementation a breeze.
   
2. Pub/Sub support (using IBM MQ) and MQTT broker support bring complex patterns (CQRS, etc) and services to life real quickly.
3. Web interface, REST API for viewing services, admin, stats, and deployment are premium features, which makes IIB stand among its competition.
4. Several connectors for various different protocols.

1. My biggest concern is its MQ dependency, which are still not 100% independent. E.g., in the case of aggregation flows, IIB needs a complete overhaul for aggregation implementation to achieve orchestration implementation.
2. Development toolkit (based on Eclipse) should be improved in terms of responsiveness.
3. It lacks unit testing framework similar to JUnit for Java or MUnit for Mule ESB.
4. IIB run time and installation still need to shed more weight and become lightweight for to become full Docker applications.

No issues. It is stable enough.

No scalability issues.

IBM support is fantastic and quick.

We did not switch. Wherever I have implemented it, it was either:

1. IIB/WMB was already there.
2. It was the preferred choice.

I would rate the initial setup (with MQ) on AIX and Linux as a six out of 10, as it needs expertise.

We implemented it in-house.

We are going through digital transformation journey. For now, the solution is helping us.

1. The IIB setup is still very command-based. The implementation is not so easy.
2. It still needs a lot of environment and OS-related tweaking.
3. Pricing is on par with its competition.

We evaluated Mule ESB. We didn't consider because:

1. Mulesoft was relatively new. Hence, it lacked skilled resources.
2. The cost was high compared to IIB.
3. The client had a good relationship with IBM. 

IIB is a great product. It could use some minor improvements, such as: 

1. IIB toolkit needs design overhaul; maybe some themes.
2. Current aggregation implementation should be deprecated. MQ independent, as well as an intuitive solution, should be proposed.
3. App Connect Enterprise (IIB's newer version) might solve the above issue.

• WebSphere MQ Connectivity: MQInput node and MQOutput node
• Load Management: We can configure more than one instance of an application
• High Availability (multi-instance broker)
• ESQ
• Microsoft .NET Support/.NETCompute node: This has helped us to reuse our existing .NET code
• Web Standards connectivity: HTTPInput node and HTTPReply node

• We have improved our productivity
• We can easily and quickly create and integrate applications
• With the help of built-in nodes, we are no longer required to create our own code for HTTPInput node, HTTPReply node, FileInput node, FileOutPut node, etc.
• Built-in parsers are helping us in rapid development
• Development is mostly just drag and drop, e.g., MQ integration
• Deployment is much easier now

• ESQL: ESQL requires some more functions e.g., encryption/decryption/hashing. Currently, we have to use .NET or Java.
• WebSphere MQ: This needs a web-based remote monitoring and administration panel.
• Oracle Wire Protocol ODBC Driver: This needs to be compatible with different versions of Oracle, at least Oracle 10G and above versions.
• A centralized log monitoring console is required where we can monitor all traffic (in/out) of the broker node.

We have been using this product for four years.

Stability is mostly fine. However, integration with Oracle is not good. Sometimes the Oracle Wire Protocol ODBC driver creates problems, especially if database links are used in SPs. We have to restart our service to resume connectivity.

Scalability is mostly fine. However, in the IBM integration toolkit, there should be something like “Solution Folder in Visual Studio” to keep related applications and integration services together.

Previously, we were using Microsoft Biztalk Server for middleware and integrations. Because of the obsolete version of Biztalk and the end of the support agreement with Microsoft, we decided to switch to some new technologies with advanced features where we can implement SOA services. Hence we decided to go with IIB.

It was a challenging task because we were moving to a new technology, especially from Microsoft to IBM. With the help of IBM technical sales staff, online help, and some trial and error, we now have a good implementation of IIB.

As a member of the technical implementation team, I’m not involved in pricing and licensing considerations.

While evaluating IIB, we also evaluated Oracle Service Bus (OSB) and the latest version of Microsoft Biztalk Server.

I would recommend implementing this with proper planning such as:

• Create and implement IIB in a High Availability (HA) environment
• Create all required integration servers (execution groups) and assign them with HTTP/HTTPS ports explicitly
• Configure SSL from the start
• Use proper naming conventions for integration nodes, integration servers, and queue managers.

IBM Integration Bus integrates various systems by receiving, transforming, and routing messages in different formats, such as XML or JSON. It supports integration between different applications and services within the organization, enabling effective communication.

The solution has enhanced data processing capabilities by allowing efficient data integration and transformation. It has improved operational efficiency by handling various protocols and integrating different services.

The most valuable features are its support for various protocols (like HTTP) and its integration capabilities, which facilitate communication between different systems and services within the organization.

They could integrate AI technologies with the product. Additionally, ongoing developments and enhancements in integration technologies could be beneficial.

I have been using IBM Integration Bus for 11 years.

The product is stable. 

The solution is scalable with OpenShift, allowing adjustments based on customer requirements.

The initial setup was straightforward, taking approximately 15 to 30 minutes to complete.

Overall, I rate IBM Integration Bus an eight out of ten.