The only issue we've noticed is a lack of awareness when it comes to partner collaboration. Customers prefer using separate API gateways for scalability. Apart from that, feature-wise, most API management solutions offer similar features and learning resources on how to use them.

The pricing could be improved. In cases where customers require real-time sync or real-time calling groups with IoT, the volume of data and time lag become a concern. AWS charges for data ingress and egress, which could be further reduced. This would be helpful for customers dealing with large amounts of data coming in or going out from their systems. So, improving pricing for volume data transfer is something that can be considered, as it has been consistent feedback from customers.

The main concern is connectivity. When someone requests a mobile score, we need to query the backend DB using prospect numbers. This involves going from AWS to the Oracle DB in Oracle Cloud, fetching data through SQL queries, and then feeding it back to the model running on AWS. This process takes a considerable amount of time.

It's like dealing with connectivity issues because of the direct connection. Although I find AWS API Gateway better than Oracle in many aspects, the network connectivity challenges force us to consider using Oracle API Gateway for our new product, LOS (Load Origination System). This new product will involve extensive interaction with the databases, and we cannot afford network connectivity issues. This is the only drawback I've encountered.

Even though AWS API Gateway is better in several respects, we are leaning towards Oracle API Gateway due to its compatibility with our Oracle backend databases. Traditionally, enterprise databases are Oracle databases, and that's why we work with Oracle Cloud. We're also exploring MuleSoft, which offers a wide range of features and services, although cost is a concern.

The solution could improve signature validation. They should offer signature validation if there is any request. There needs to be some sort of mechanism. They need to be able to validate the signature at the API gateway level. 

As a tool, Amazon API gateway works well. I believe that there could be more features associated with analytics since it is an area where the product lacks. If it is possible to get analytics automatically from Amazon API Gateway, it would be a great feature or add-on.

The solution has a major limitation compared to Google Cloud. Amazon API Gateway will wait for only 30 seconds to get a response from other services, such as the Lambda function. API Gateway can be directly integrated with the Lambda function, and a response from the Lambda function must be obtained within 30 seconds.

Amazon API Gateway is not as complete as Apigee and needs to be improved by adding more features to become a more robust application.

For some use cases, Apigee is more complete than Amazon API Gateway. With Apigee, you can integrate some endpoints with better latency. Apigee has the cloud EPG Microgateway resource, which can be put inside our Kubernetes cluster. Integration with Apigee can have more efficiency in terms of latency. Apigee is an enterprise architecture application wherein you can use a proxy.

I would like to improve the restrictions and security elements of the solution, as there are certain configurations that are not currently supported. There are certain restrictions that cannot be implemented without web access.

In the next release, I would like a feature that can validate requests and filter out any jQuery injections. Additionally, I would like to prioritize these requests. I've noticed that such features are usually not available in web applications.

The solution's configuration for API gateways using SAM and CloudFormation templates could be more accessible.

As for improvements, I haven't fully explored Amazon API Gateway yet, but I believe better governance and monitoring features would be beneficial.

We are also interested in telemetry, analytics, and other features that are important for our API management. I would appreciate more comprehensive telemetry information, diagnostics, and improved monitoring capabilities for the services and endpoints.

If I take into consideration the past three to four years, during which I used the tool, I would say that some missing and external configurations were not possible in the product, and it was a bit difficult to manage.

Amazon API Gateway is expensive, making it one of the product's shortcomings where improvements are required.

Amazon API Gateway needs to focus on minimizing latency.

It is somewhat costly, particularly when it introduces server-related features, which are often scheduled on our end. Their support services come at a considerable cost, leaving room for improvement.

The UI and UX of this solution could be improved. From a use cases perspective, you need to have an internal and external gateway. AWS can only handle external traffic so has to be used together with another solution. 

When working with XML payloads, there can be issues due to the lack of a seamless connection between API Gateway and Lambda functions. This has led me to devise shortcuts that aren't entirely straightforward but serve my needs.

It's important to consider the type of gateway endpoint carefully. There appear to be two distinct types. It's crucial to make an informed selection based on your project's requirements. When utilizing API Gateway, the choices one makes regarding endpoint types and properties are pivotal. After initially choosing an endpoint type, it is difficult to switch to a different type later on.

A lower price would definitely be an improvement. 

I would like to see more AI-based capabilities in future releases. 

The tool's UI requires time to understand. 

API Gateway lacks some usability features that would make it a standard platform for development. For instance, it doesn't include a built-in developer portal, requiring custom development for such functionality. This customization can be extensive and akin to building an entire API management platform from scratch.

The API Gateway lacks the capability to directly facilitate API strategy development or user onboarding workflows. For instance, it doesn't offer out-of-the-box features like developer portals or publisher portals, which are essential for streamlining user onboarding and interaction. These portals play a crucial role in enhancing user adoption by providing a seamless experience for developers and users alike. Currently, API Gateway primarily serves as a technical gateway without built-in support for user engagement functionalities.

We would like to see more UI-based monitoring.

When it comes to integration, it is currently integrated with CloudWatch monitoring. As a result, monitoring the APIs to external servers is not an option. This is a feature that should be added, similar to what we have for ServiceManager.

Monitoring could be improved.

The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required.

We faced a few issues with the documentation. We had to figure out many things on our own, or we had to watch some videos. It would have been much easier if the documentation were a little clearer.

They could include more support tools in the product.

I faced issues with the timeout because some machine-learning scripts would take more than 30 seconds. Since the first invocation of AWS Lambda takes more than 30 seconds because of Lambda's cold start, Amazon API Gateway blocks that resource, thereby aborting the invocation.

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.

We have not yet explored all of the capabilities. We are looking for a developer portal that may or may not be included, we are not sure.

The integration could be improved.

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.

The course management needs improvement. It's always an issue to set up the course management, especially when you use data form. We use a lot of TerraForm scripts to build up our environment. The rest is pretty straightforward and pretty easy to use.

Currently, I'm not facing any issues with Amazon API Gateway, which satisfies my requirements. I'm pretty happy with what Amazon API Gateway offers, but as its pricing is on the higher side, that's one area for improvement in the solution.

What I'd like to see in the next release of Amazon API Gateway is an improvement in the status checks you get from the monitoring feature of the solution. Currently, you get the number of requests received, the number of reports, etc., but if there are more details than what's given by Amazon API Gateway, that will improve the solution.

The user interface, in general, can be better. The user interface for the entire Amazon cloud can be more friendly. There are some scenarios that are not really easy to manage and configure through the user interface.

The solution's performance and scalability could be better than Azure.

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

The user interface could be improved, as well as customer support and having a local customer representative in a country. Monitoring could also be improved a bit.

Amazon API Gateway can improve the user interface in some areas it could be more polished.

In a future release, it would be beneficial for more documentation, even though their documentation is already very good, but better documentation could help us build more of what you want yourself.

I am not completely satisfied with Technical Support. They were finding it difficult to get to the AWS API gateway. Also, the traffic percentage was not calculating correctly.

When it comes to  DDoS protection, I would like to see that become available at the API Gateway level.

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.

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.