Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
3scale vs Kong: What are the differences?
Key Differences Between 3scale and Kong
Introduction
In the world of API management, both 3scale and Kong are popular choices. However, there are some key differences between the two that can help you make an informed decision based on your specific requirements.
Deployment Model: 3scale is a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solution, meaning it is hosted and managed by the vendor. On the other hand, Kong is available as open-source software which can be self-hosted or deployed in the cloud. This difference gives you more control and flexibility over your infrastructure with Kong.
Pricing and Licensing: 3scale follows a subscription-based pricing model, often charging based on the number of requests or the features required. Kong, as open-source software, is free to use, but for additional features and support, Kong Enterprise can be purchased. This difference in pricing and licensing can be a significant factor depending on your budget and specific needs.
Customizability and Extensibility: Kong, being an open-source solution, allows for extensive customizability and extensibility. You can modify the code, add plugins, and tailor the solution to your requirements. On the other hand, while 3scale does offer some customization options, they are more limited compared to Kong. This difference can be crucial if your organization requires more flexibility and control over the API gateway.
Developer Experience: 3scale provides a developer portal out-of-the-box, allowing you to document, publish, and manage your APIs efficiently. Kong, on the other hand, does not include a developer portal. However, Kong integrates well with other API management solutions and can be seamlessly connected with existing developer portals. This difference may be considered if having a built-in developer portal is a priority for your organization.
Community and Support: Kong benefits from a strong open-source community, which means that you can get extensive support from the community forums, documentation, and plugins developed by the community. 3scale, being a SaaS solution, comes with dedicated technical support provided by the vendor. Depending on your preference and requirements, this difference in support options can be a deciding factor.
Security Features: Both 3scale and Kong offer various security features such as rate limiting, authentication, and JWT validation. However, Kong also provides plugins for additional security measures like Web Application Firewall (WAF) and Bot detection. This difference in security features can be significant if your organization requires advanced security capabilities.
In Summary, the key differences between 3scale and Kong lie in the deployment model, pricing/licensing, customizability/extensibility, developer experience, community/support, and security features. These differences can help you choose the API management solution that best fits your specific requirements.
Istio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn-keyIstio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn key solution with Rancher whereas Kong completely lacks here. Traffic distribution in Istio can be done via canary, a/b, shadowing, HTTP headers, ACL, whitelist whereas in Kong it's limited to canary, ACL, blue-green, proxy caching. Istio has amazing community support which is visible via Github stars or releases when comparing both.
Pros of 3scale
- Integrated developer portal6
- Full lifecycle api management4
- Plugable api management layer3
- Separates policy definition from enforcement3
Pros of Kong
- Easy to maintain37
- Easy to install32
- Flexible26
- Great performance21
- Api blueprint7
- Custom Plugins4
- Kubernetes-native3
- Security2
- Has a good plugin infrastructure2
- Agnostic2
- Load balancing1
- Documentation is clear1
- Very customizable1