Traefik Enterprise Reviews

My main use case for Traefik Enterprise is that we initially used AWS Network Load Balancer for our application with our Nginx Ingress controller, which provided IP whitelisting and an additional layer of security. Since it got deprecated, we preferred Traefik over Nginx Network Load Balancer because the Network Load Balancer works well with fast latency compared to the application. We thought we would migrate to Traefik to have the same latency performance as Application Load Balancers. We migrated successfully across all our production environments, and it is working smoothly with very smooth handling of ingresses and traffic.

A specific example of how I'm using Traefik Enterprise in my environment is that we replaced the Network Load Balancer with Nginx Load Balancer Controller with Traefik Load Balancer and Application Load Balancer. We introduced Traefik to address latency issues, so the main use case for latency is what we are using Traefik for.

I currently have nothing else to add about my main use case or how Traefik Enterprise fits in my workflow. As of now, there are no additional needs from Traefik. I would have suggested improvements if I had encountered any known issues, but currently we do not have anything.

The best features Traefik Enterprise offers in my opinion regarding latency is that it has the same performance as AWS Load Balancer, whereas the Application Load Balancer and AWS Load Balancer Controller do not have the same latency. With replacing the Traefik Load Balancer Controller with the same Application Load Balancer in AWS, you have less latency. I am not sure how this is happening because I have not gone through the deep level where some of our seniors have done the POC and implemented this to achieve it with our use case. I would need to do a more in-depth deep dive to provide a more comprehensive review.

I find additional features particularly valuable in Traefik Enterprise, such as ease of configuration, security capabilities, and integration with our existing tools. It is easy to use, though it is somewhat complex compared to Application Load Balancer because you have Ingress routes and entry points and some other things. It is easy to handle management, and the Ingress rules are easy to manage. We have separate Ingress rules rather than having lengthy configurations. We can write Ingress routes separately for each domain, and it is also cost-efficient. We can use a single load balancer for multiple domains with multiple routes, and it handles cross-namespace. It also adds more value in terms of security by managing WAF integrations.

In terms of how Traefik Enterprise can be improved, I have not explored in more depth. I have only used it for our specific use case. If I had explored everything, I would have found something that needs to be improved. Since I have not explored in-depth, I cannot judge what could be improved or what could be given more focus in the future.

I have previously used Traefik Enterprise in my past experience, and currently I have been using it for around six to eight months.

Traefik Enterprise has been stable in my experience with no downtime or issues.

Traefik Enterprise's scalability has been effective as it is handling traffic smoothly and the latency is also good.

I do not have any knowledge on whether we previously used a different solution or any comments on that. I am not sure if anything was used or not.

I have not seen a return on investment and I am not handling this, so I do not have access to relevant metrics like fewer employees needed or money saved.

I am not sure about the experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing as the management might be handling that.

Before choosing Traefik Enterprise, we did not evaluate other options and directly used Traefik. We explored which tools could replace our use case, and Traefik was the first one we found. We did the POC and achieved our goals, so we have not gone through other solutions.

A specific example of how I'm using Traefik Enterprise in my environment is that we replaced the Network Load Balancer with Nginx Load Balancer Controller with Traefik Load Balancer and Application Load Balancer. We introduced Traefik for the latency issues, so the main use case for the latency is what we are using Traefik for.

I am not sure how much of a difference it made in latency as this is handled by the SRE team of our company, so I do not have any idea on that.

I would rate Traefik Enterprise overall as a nine out of ten. I chose nine out of ten because I have not explored all other things, but it is easy to configure and it handles cross-namespace and manages optimization like cost optimization seamlessly. It is easier to configure multiple Ingress routes and entry points. It simplifies things compared to the application or network load balancer, which is quite messy. That is why I chose nine, and I have not explored the remaining parts like the whole traffic level. If I would have explored, I would have given ten out of ten.

My advice to others looking into using Traefik Enterprise is that it depends on their requirements. I cannot say they can migrate easily, but they can achieve migration and have a smoother experience. If they have a larger team handling hundreds of domains, it is smooth to manage with Traefik Enterprise. I would recommend them to use Traefik Enterprise.

I do not have any additional thoughts about Traefik Enterprise before we wrap up.

At Razorpay, the tool is used as a reverse proxy, ingress controller, and CRD management. A year and a half ago, my company started to move from Traefik Enterprise v1.0 to Traefik Enterprise v2.0. The tool handles everything, including the integrations with our different cloud providers and some of the other features we use in our company, such as rate limiting, which is something that is available within Traefik Enterprise.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that ingress management is way easier in Traefik Enterprise, and there are many tools present within Traefik Enterprise's repositories, which allowed us to easily transition to it. The tool's dashboard is very helpful in handling any issues that we might face as we get a very good overview straight up from Traefik Enterprise's dashboard, which helps us debug or do anything during any sort of production issue.

I would say that maybe along the same path that Traefik Enterprise is currently on, you have most of the things straight up in the UI that you can check even with minimal training. You can just use, understand, and debug things from the UI. There is still work to be done in the tool, which can ensure that anyone with just minimal know-how of the product doesn't have to really go into the terminal and see the status of routes, concierge routes, or whether certain things are up or not. One should be able to just check things straight up from the UI and get to know what kind of issues are there in the solution, and even though such a feature is already there in the tool, there is more work to be done in it.

I would not particularly recommend any improvements when it comes to the security of traffic. I think the tool is pretty pluggable in terms of whatever security we want to put in our routes, even though it is just as a middleware or just as a supporting product for whatever we have in our services.

I have been using Traefik Enterprise for two and a half years. I am a user of the tool.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

The tool handles scalability pretty easily. Adding more instances of services and all are pretty intuitive to do using Traefik Enterprise.

There is a dedicated DevOps team in my company that basically is the first line for anything to do with dashboards or the onboarding of a new service onto it. Everything is handled by dedicated teams in my company, but other than that, every team has some people who work on the infra side. I would say that more than 100 people use the tool in my office.

My company has used Envoy in the past.

When my company was moving from Envoy to Traefik Enterprise, the tool's initial setup phase was a little difficult to manage in the beginning. Earlier, we had Traefik Enterprise v1.0, and then, eventually, we moved to Traefik Enterprise v2.0. Now, there is Traefik v3 as well. When moving to Traefik Enterprise v2.0, I felt the transition itself was a little bit difficult, but it was relatively smooth once the entire activity was completed.

The solution is deployed using AWS cloud services.

One of the reasons why my company moved from Envoy, as well as the other in-house options, to Traefik Enterprise was because doing many things in-house was overkill. Traefik Enterprise was a relatively cheaper option for my company. I would say that Traefik Enterprise is cheaper than the other alternatives in the market.

The API gateway functionality in Traefik Enterprise has improved our operations. With Envoy, managing all the routing and monitoring was much more difficult. Moving to Traefik Enterprise has made things easier for the ops teams in my company.

I have not yet integrated Traefik Enterprise with any type of AI.

My recommendations to someone depending on their use case and requirements. What AWS provides is good enough for you, and if the costs are also good enough for you, then you can stick to it. In our company's use case, we found Traefik Enterprise to be the most suitable tool for our environment. Everything depends on the particular scale that you are looking at or the particular type of API gateway functionalities that you need for your services, as well as what middleware functionalities you might need or what you might have in-house for yourself.

When I say a beginner, the whole realm of handling API gateways and service middlewares, I would say it is not a very beginner-friendly domain itself, but assuming that someone who has recently ventured into such areas but is experienced in general, then it should be pretty intuitive for them to use Traefik Enterprise.

There is some scope for improvement in the way a lot of things can be managed straight up from the UI. For power users, the tool is very intuitive, so I would say it is a pretty good product.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

My main use case for Traefik Enterprise is that there are multiple use cases. A specific example of one of those use cases is that we use it as a proxy in multiple places, for instance, in our UCD.

Traefik Enterprise offers distributed high availability; for instance, the Raft consensus mechanism eliminates the need for an external key-value store. The advanced middleware now supports JWT, SAML, or LDAP authentication, and it also has great distributed rate limiting.

The distributed rate limiting has helped my team because we use the advanced middleware as confidential, but the rate limiting is cluster-wide rate limiting that prevents service overloads across multiple replicas, making it much smarter than just regular rate limiting.

Traefik Enterprise has positively impacted my organization because it is easy to use and it is really great software. It is difficult to compare to others, but it is really good.

Traefik Enterprise can be improved because the learning curve is quite difficult; the basic setups are quick, but the advanced ones are very difficult to learn. The UI dashboard has really great usability, but it remains mostly read-only. Having more interactive troubleshooting or configuration capabilities directly in the UI would be a major plus, and although the documentation is okay, it could be better.

I have been working in my current field for five years.

The customer support for Traefik Enterprise is good, but we did not use it.

I did not use a different solution before Traefik Enterprise.

I have seen a return on investment, but this is confidential.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Traefik Enterprise is that it is really good.

My advice to others looking into using Traefik Enterprise is that I would just try it; it is a good product. I would give Traefik Enterprise a rating of 9.

I use Traefik Enterprise as an API Gateway, which has TLS termination, and then it forwards the request to multiple microservices. I basically use it as an API Gateway with TLS termination.

I used Traefik Enterprise as an API Gateway to forward my request to the microservices, and I used a file-based provider so it can be dynamically changed whenever we have new services. Basically, we don't need to restart the service. It has a hot-reload feature, so I mainly use it for that primary purpose.

Traefik Enterprise supports hot reloading of TLS certificates and hot reload of SSL certificates. With NGINX, we need to manually restart the service if we're using file-based SSL. Even without using the ACME protocol, just for file-based SSL certificates, you can implement hot reloading of certificates without restarting the API Gateway service. That was the main helpful feature in Traefik Enterprise.

The best feature of Traefik Enterprise is service discovery, which is excellent because it supports the modern API Gateway feature of service discovery.

Dynamic configuration is one of the most useful features I have used in Traefik Enterprise.

Traefik Enterprise also provides a web-based API for viewing the current status of the Traefik Enterprise instance, and that is a best feature. The YAML-based configuration is so simple to use.

Traefik Enterprise has made it so easy to set up, and I have noticed a positive impact on my organization with its ease of configuration. The easy setup and lack of network-specific requirements have benefited my organization, which has resulted in time saved and reduced complexity.

The certificate feature I previously mentioned is about hot reloading of the certificate, and if the file-based SSL certificate is changed, it works only if the certificate is inside the directory we have mentioned in our dynamic YAML. If the dynamic YAML needs to be separated from the certificate directory, the hot reloading part will not be working. I need something that works even if you have separate files and a separate path for the certificate and for the dynamic YAML configuration file. The hot reloading part should work even if they are both in different directories.

That is the main thing on my mind regarding improvements needed in Traefik Enterprise.

I have been using Traefik Enterprise for one year.

I would like to continue with the review of the features of Traefik Enterprise. We saved a lot of time because Traefik Enterprise is so easy to configure. I gave this review a rating of ten.

My main use case for Traefik Enterprise is for enterprise applications, security purposes, support, and scalability and reliability.

When I use Traefik Enterprise for security and scalability, I use it for API gateway routing and load balancing microservices on a day-to-day basis.

API gateway routing or load balancing is sufficient for my needs.

The best features Traefik Enterprise offers me involve DevOps, which I find myself using the most.

Traefik Enterprise has impacted my organization positively, especially in the e-commerce sector.

Traefik Enterprise has helped my e-commerce systems by improving routing stability, cost efficiency, reliability, and measurable performance time.

Traefik Enterprise works properly and there is nothing that has been frustrating about it.

Support is available.

My advice to someone considering using Traefik Enterprise is that it is suitable for customers. I would rate this review a 7.