Senior Manager, IT Channels & Integration at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2023-09-20T09:24:00Z
Sep 20, 2023
One area for improvement in webMethods API Gateway is orchestration. Currently, API Gateway lacks built-in orchestration capabilities, so organizations may need to rely on other applications for this purpose. For example, if you are calling two services and one of them fails, you may need another application to handle the rollback or recovery process. Improving orchestration within API Gateway could simplify complex service interactions.
The product should provide more customization options. Application of policy management is not easy. We have to do a lot of customization and configuration. Documentation is also a problem. Understanding the overall architecture is difficult.
The gateway server itself can improve the message queue implementation by considering the top ten web security controls. I would like to request the integration of response caching into the memory database, which would eliminate the need to construct logic within the API itself, and instead implement it directly in the gateway. The price has room for improvement.
There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere. I would like for this to be included in the features since the client I work with always tends to avoid the solution. And if the client does not have existing interfaces with it, they choose not to proceed.
Vice President - Digital Integration at Kellton Tech Solutions Limited
Real User
2021-06-03T10:01:07Z
Jun 3, 2021
In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate API consumption plans and to be able to throttle API execution against those consumption plans at run time could be better. Those are abilities that might need some improvement. The on-premises setup can get a little complex, needs to be more simplified.
In relation to the lifecycle features, the user interface and the performance can be improved. It is not the quickest application and the user interface is not most up to date. It's a tool that has existed for quite some time, and there haven't been a lot of improvements. With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved.
Enterprise Architect at PT Bank Mandiri (Persero) Tbk.
Real User
2020-12-15T08:57:00Z
Dec 15, 2020
Previously, we had some difficulties with end-to-end lifecycle management of APIs because the product was not yet mature enough. Two years ago, it was not yet mature in terms of the capabilities, which were still separated and not yet consolidated. There were several modules of webMethods API Gateway which needed to be consolidated into one webMethods API Gateway. Previously, they had two separate modules for API management as well as others. One of the improvements that need to be added into future releases is the ability to support other third-party monitoring tools. I know that they already support Jenkins, but in Mandiri. We use Bamboo for the deployment as well as part of Jenkins. We also install other monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics, for collecting information on performance and the problems of API Gateway hosting services. With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance. With their API-Portal, you need to have flexibility when changing the layout and teams, giving more flexibility to rearrange and do some type of UX/UI that fits into your organization. The API-Portal that comes from Software AG has some of those limitations, with only certain parts that can be fully customized.
Once your APIs are “out there,” hackers have a “way in” to your business. Lock that door! Protect your data, applications—even your company’s reputation—with robust API runtime security. The right API gateway will keep out wrong-doers and welcome only authorized consumers.
With cybercrime costs surging to $2 trillion by 2019, look for the most impermeable API gateway you can find. You’ll need basic security features, like authentication, authorization, digital encryption and digital...
One area for improvement in webMethods API Gateway is orchestration. Currently, API Gateway lacks built-in orchestration capabilities, so organizations may need to rely on other applications for this purpose. For example, if you are calling two services and one of them fails, you may need another application to handle the rollback or recovery process. Improving orchestration within API Gateway could simplify complex service interactions.
The product should provide more customization options. Application of policy management is not easy. We have to do a lot of customization and configuration. Documentation is also a problem. Understanding the overall architecture is difficult.
The gateway server itself can improve the message queue implementation by considering the top ten web security controls. I would like to request the integration of response caching into the memory database, which would eliminate the need to construct logic within the API itself, and instead implement it directly in the gateway. The price has room for improvement.
There are things that could be improved with the webMethods API gateway. One thing is that it's too attached to the integration service and we'd like it to be a little bit more independent. We would like for them to separate operations so that it doesn't rely on the bulky integration server and so that it can be used everywhere. I would like for this to be included in the features since the client I work with always tends to avoid the solution. And if the client does not have existing interfaces with it, they choose not to proceed.
They should develop clear visibility for the onboarding. They could also improve the clustering.
The configuring of the JWT token would be improved as it is a confusing process. We require more information on this part of the solution.
In terms of improvements, maybe on the API monetization side, having users able to create separate API consumption plans and to be able to throttle API execution against those consumption plans at run time could be better. Those are abilities that might need some improvement. The on-premises setup can get a little complex, needs to be more simplified.
In relation to the lifecycle features, the user interface and the performance can be improved. It is not the quickest application and the user interface is not most up to date. It's a tool that has existed for quite some time, and there haven't been a lot of improvements. With respect to the API gateway, the runtime component, the stability after a new release is something that can be improved.
Previously, we had some difficulties with end-to-end lifecycle management of APIs because the product was not yet mature enough. Two years ago, it was not yet mature in terms of the capabilities, which were still separated and not yet consolidated. There were several modules of webMethods API Gateway which needed to be consolidated into one webMethods API Gateway. Previously, they had two separate modules for API management as well as others. One of the improvements that need to be added into future releases is the ability to support other third-party monitoring tools. I know that they already support Jenkins, but in Mandiri. We use Bamboo for the deployment as well as part of Jenkins. We also install other monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics, for collecting information on performance and the problems of API Gateway hosting services. With performance, there is room for improvement in regards to if we would like to put another extra layer of security on it, such as SSL. This is affecting their performance quite significantly. They need to improve the process of managing the SSL and other things inside their solutions, so there will not be quite such a significant impact to the performance. With their API-Portal, you need to have flexibility when changing the layout and teams, giving more flexibility to rearrange and do some type of UX/UI that fits into your organization. The API-Portal that comes from Software AG has some of those limitations, with only certain parts that can be fully customized.