Kong Enterprise Reviews

I lead the integration practices in my organization and have been working in integration for the past 16 years, managing API integrations with various API manager tools such as Kong Enterprise.

We are primarily using Kong for the API gateway functionality. For example, we've had a couple of mobile applications with outbound traffic where we would use the Kong Enterprise gateway to expose the API by applying authorization, authentication, and other security policies.

We have also used Kong for role-based access control mechanism (RBAC) and integrated it with our enterprise directory in order provide it with this form of access control.

There was another particular use case in which we performed some customization, as well. In that scenario, we wrote a Lua script on top of Kong to add an AppDynamics plugin to our web server, for observability and monitoring purposes. 

Kong has been used over a large user base, not only because it's an enterprise application, but also because the mobile applications we worked with were B2C-based in the retail industry, so the number of users was quite high.

There are a few features that I like about Kong when it comes to authentication and authorization. Specifically, being able to use Kong for role-based access control (RBAC), and then further being able to integrate the RBAC mechanism with our enterprise directory, was very useful.

Another nice aspect of Kong Enterprise is the ability to customize it with Lua script, such as when we developed a way to provide observability for our web server with AppDynamics. 

Kong is meant for north-south communications, so it will be interesting to see what solutions they can come up with in the realms of east-west communications, service-to-service communications, and Zero Trust architecture. I believe that if they can provide for these areas, then they will be able to solve the overall integration and security concerns for microservices architecture in general.

I have used Kong Enterprise for a year and a half.

I don't recall that we have faced any challenges in terms of stability. It has been a good, solid implementation.

It is scalable in the sense that, as we started putting things onto the cloud, we added one application and then we scaled up the same instance with Kong for multiple applications, which was where we served everything. And since it was a mobile B2C application focused on the retail sector, the number of users was quite high.

The tech support was good. We mainly used them when we needed help with our Lua plugin installation and they were responsive to our needs. The team we dealt with were based in Singapore.

We previously tried using Apigee, but for our needs, Kong was the right solution.

The setup wasn't that simple. There was definitely a learning curve because Lua as a language was new to us and so we had to learn about Lua script first. At the same time, we also faced some other challenges in the implementation where we had to ask for professional support from Kong Enterprise.

The technical team working on our Kong deployment included three or four people on the infrastructure side and another two or three involved in development.

I don't have any information on licensing costs currently.

We also evaluated different options such as those provided by Mulesoft and others.

Kong Enterprise is a good API gateway and API management product which is based on lightweight and high-performance software. However, there will likely be a learning curve for beginners because they are using Lua script, which is not that popular. Regardless, anybody coming from a core software and integration background should be okay.

It's always good to keep in mind that you should use Kong for the purpose it is meant for, rather than overloading it or overburdening it with use cases that are not appropriate.

I would rate Kong Enterprise a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is API management.

The route limiting feature is very valuable.

The product could be improved by making the scaling up process easier. For example, it becomes difficult if you try to scale it up to multiple clusters.

We have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The process of scaling up with this product is difficult. We have a small company, and about 20 people are working with this product, and approximately five people are maintaining it.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. Initially, we used to have challenges, but thanks to a third-party vendor who developed a plugin called Konger, a UI dashboard, we can interact easily with Kong. However, it is not an official plugin.

The initial setup was straightforward.

The implementation process is easy because we have our own documented script, which automatically deploys it out of the box, depending on which environment we choose.

The product price is higher than similar products. Fortunately, a community version is available.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the scaling up process could be improved. I recommend new users store Kong Enterprise on a Red Hat-certified operating system, so they don't have challenges managing the binaries. Additionally, I would advise them always to use Kong Enterprise alongside a proxy so they have more extensible integration in terms of routing. I enjoyed using the Mongo DB, the Cassandra DB offering, and the Postgres DB offering as the database of choice because it becomes highly scalable and writes fast. Hence, I found that deploying and choosing Cassandra DB made it much faster to run.

We have several microservices that are secure using Kong Enterprise. Our microservices are managed through Kong Enterprise API management.

We have integrated with IDP to secure it. We use multiple plugins that are bundled with Kong Enterprise.

The features of Kong are plugin-based network services. It enables us to include our security policy when creating customers.

Kong Enterprise has excellent plugin support. This is a feature that I was looking for.

The price could be lower.

I have been using Kong Enterprise for more than one year.

Kong Enterprise's stability has never been an issue for us.

Kong Enterprise scales easily.

We have more than 300 people who use this solution.

We have teams of 30 to 40 people running multiple products that are used with Kong Enterprise.

We had a problem with the 1.2 EMT enablement, and they provided a solution. They've been very helpful. The technical team is always available to help us with our problems.

In my previous company, I used an API.

The installation went well. It was good. This installation was completed by another team.

When I have installed this solution, I found it to be easy. For me, the installation takes about 15 to 20 minutes on average.

Because it is open-source, it should be less expensive than others.

The licensing fees are paid yearly.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I would rate Kong Enterprise an eight out of ten.

Kong Enterprise was used for standard API gateway use cases for Microarchitecture.

The most valuable features of Kong Enterprise are the out-of-the-box open source easy functionality.

Kong Enterprise can improve the customization to be able to do the integration properly.

I have been using Kong Enterprise for approximately two years.

The stability of Kong Enterprise could improve and the robustness around some of the modules.

Kong Enterprise can improve in scaling.

The support from Kong Enterprise is good.

The initial setup of Kong Enterprise is straightforward. The installation was easy.

There is not a lot of maintenance using Kong Enterprise.

There are many factors that influence the price of Kong Enterprise, such as scale, licenses, and usage.

Kong Enterprise is a good solution. However, you need to have the ability to properly use it. You need to have in-house skills to make the optimum usage of the solution. It's not a solution that you can expect to be providing everything off the shelves. You have to create your own hooks to properly benefit.

I rate Kong Enterprise an eight out of ten.

We deploy this solution to our customers who are enterprise companies. We are partners with Kong and I'm the director of engineering. 

The solution provides good performance. 

They need to improve the developer portal. There are currently no isolated data plans for federated teams that I can manage easily, and that's something they should look at. 

I've been using this solution for one year. 

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We've deployed in numerous companies so there are likely many thousands of users. 

The technical support is good. 

The initial setup is reasonably easy, it takes about two to three weeks.

Licensing costs are reasonable compared to other products.

We have been evaluating other solutions and for now Kong comes out on top in terms of performance. 

I would advise to start with a POC to make sure all use cases are met.

I rate this solution seven out of 10. 

A central API gateway solution.

The concept of using central API gateway is the change, not the product. Kong was selected based on our CBA (choose between alternative) process.

Almost everything needed is there.

We would like to see an automatic data API - when we have a database table or a store procedure - we want to be able to select it and the data API will be created automatically for GET and CRUD operations in OData format. This feature already exists in other solution and it is a game changer - reducing efforts, risks, and reliability.

I've used it for almost three or four years. I first implemented it eight or nine years ago.

The setup of Kong itself was very easy.

The price is reasonable compared to that of alternative solutions.

Everyone should conduct a CBA based on his requirements in order to choose the right solution for his organization.

Yes.

I would rate Kong Enterprise at nine on a scale from one to ten.