Kong Gateway Enterprise Reviews

Our e-commerce customers use Kong Enterprise.

Customers cannot use the public cloud because of regulations. Kong Enterprise can be used in any environment, like the Red Hat and Openshift environments. Kong Enterprise comes with some ready plug-ins, which is very good for the customers. Kong Enterprise supports hierarchy and redundancy.

Kong Enterprise has decided not to support the web portal feature anymore, but I think that feature should stay in the on-premises solution.

I have been using Kong Enterprise for four to five years.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

The solution's technical support is good and responsive.

Positive

The initial setup of the solution is very straightforward.

You can install Kong Enterprise in five minutes or half an hour. If the customer is ready for deployment with the Kubernetes or VMware environment, Kong Enterprise's installation is very easy.

The solution's scalability is very nice. Kong Enterprise is a key product in the market with good stability and high availability. Our customers can easily integrate their existing CICD pipelines with Kong Enterprise.

We chose Kong Enterprise because it is a software-based company, and latency and redundancy are very important for our client. Most of the other vendors use the old-school appliance-based solution. Kong Enterprise is very keen to apply the existing CI/CD pipeline. I would recommend Kong Enterprise to other users because of its scalability, security, and redundancy.

Overall, I rate Kong Enterprise ten out of ten.

Kong enterprise has significantly enhanced our ability to manage and secure our Microservices. Its most valuable feature is monitoring. 

The tool needs improvement in UX.

I have been using the product for six months. 

I rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. My company has five to seven users. 

I have encountered communication issues. 

Neutral

I rate the tool's deployment a ten out of ten, and it took a few hours to complete. 

Kong Enterprise's pricing is reasonable for our company size. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

We have already registered a couple of APIs in Kong Community, and we are exposing those Kong APIs to our product. ITMS services will be consuming those APIs from Kong. We use the solution for load-balancing, caching, and rate-limiting APIs.

If Kong provides a 30-day license like other API gateways, we can promote the solution to more customers because they are willing to use it. We are unable to showcase the security and functional features during the trial period, which is an issue for us. We are facing issues with the solution's features like reports and traffic analysis.

We have been using the solution for more than one year.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten for stability.

Around 20 users are using the solution in our organization.

I rate the solution a six out of ten for scalability.

The solution's initial setup is very easy.

With Kong Enterprise, we are facing challenges in getting the trial license, reports, and traffic analysis. We have one customer onboarded, but we need to demonstrate to them the features, and we need to migrate from IBM One Gateway to Kong.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

My company is a financial company involved in credit card processing. We use the solution for internal IT secure gateway. 

The tool's feature that I find most beneficial is rate limiting. In our usage, especially in the financial sector, we prioritize limiting API usage. This is crucial because we provide APIs to other companies and must ensure they adhere to their allocated usage limits. Without rate limiting, there's a risk of excessive usage, which could result in significant costs. 

The solution has improved our organization's performance. 

Kong Enterprise needs to improve its pricing, which starts at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Pricing should be based on API usage rather than monthly. It should improve its documentation as well. 

I have been using the product for six months. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is horizontally scalable and very useful. My company has one customer for Kong Enterprise. I rate its scalability a ten out of ten. 

I haven't contacted technical support yet. 

The product is easy to deploy and gets completed in one hour.

Kong Enterprise is cheaper than Apigee. I rate its pricing as four out of ten. 

Kong Enterprise can connect with other tools easily. It has features like APIs and logging that programmers can use to link it up with different systems. I haven't used its integration features much, but I know its possibilities. I rate the tool 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. 

We define our enterprise architect and Kong has been selected as an API integration layer solution. We deploy in some of the markets if they're ready to go, and some of the markets are not really ready because we have 10 different markets at the moment. It's an API integration layer so that we can expedite our microservices to the market.

In our buying companies' perspective, it was easier and more unique to use compared to other platforms. The markets were pretty familiar with the solutions.

It can be our personal, our company's issue, but when we were doing separate projects, we were facing a lot of solutions. For some of our major projects, the API was not using Kong as a group platform. Sometimes they use Microsoft Azure or AWS. That's not a problem, but I think it's wasting some of our budget. We set Kong as an enterprise standard. There should be an easier way to integrate with other solutions, even though it's the same API solution layer. Comparability will be a good improvement. 

We implemented it around May time. 

It is a stable solution. 

Compared to other products, I think it's pretty scalable.

I think we have around 100 users. 

Our plan to increase usage depends on the market deployment plan. I think we should because we just started that journey last year and it's ramping up at the moment. We do have a plan to increase the manpower.

I would rate their support a seven or eight out of ten. I'm pretty okay with the technical support.

We previously used Axway. We switched to Kong because of its reliability and scalability.

We have a lot of other platforms that we're using as the API integration platform, but from the enterprise architect's perspective, Kong is the standard.

The initial setup was relatively okay, but it depends on the market. Some of the markets we had easier solutions to deploy but we had trouble with some other markets we had trouble to make them understand and go through the legacy systems so that we could link different layers to Kong's API platform. The difficulty depends on the market.

The dependency on the legacy has to be very minimal so that you can leverage your new platform or integration layer and it will be easier to build up to scale. I think those parts are the important ones you have to think through.

There are so many new technologies, and I think at the moment low-code is very popular to use. If we get into the no-code or low-code aspect, sometimes coding can be easier. If they can provide relevant no-code or low-code service to the customers, not making the process very complex, I think that will be the main winner for the platform service providers.

I would rate Kong 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 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.