StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. API Tools
  4. API Gateway
  5. Kong vs linkerd

Kong vs linkerd

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Kong
Kong
Stacks671
Followers1.5K
Votes139
GitHub Stars42.1K
Forks5.0K
linkerd
linkerd
Stacks132
Followers312
Votes7

Kong vs linkerd: What are the differences?

Introduction

Kong and Linkerd are both popular service mesh solutions that help manage the complexity of microservices architectures. However, there are key differences between the two.

  1. Deployment and Architecture: Kong is an API gateway and service mesh that is deployed as a standalone system, usually through Docker or Kubernetes. It acts as a centralized proxy for all incoming requests. In contrast, Linkerd is a lightweight service mesh that operates as a sidecar proxy, deployed alongside each microservice. This allows Linkerd to provide observability and control at the application level, while Kong operates at the infrastructure level.

  2. Service Discovery and Load Balancing: Kong uses a plugin system to handle service discovery and load balancing. With Kong, you can configure plugins to perform DNS-based service discovery and load balancing. In contrast, Linkerd uses a decentralized architecture with a sidecar proxy for each microservice. This allows Linkerd to automatically discover and load balance traffic without any additional configuration.

  3. Integration and Extensibility: Kong provides a rich set of plugins and integrations, making it highly extensible and customizable. It supports authentication, rate limiting, transformation, and caching, among other features. On the other hand, Linkerd focuses more on observability and reliability, providing features like request tracing, metrics, and circuit breaking. While Linkerd supports some extensibility, it has a narrower focus compared to Kong.

  4. Ease of Use and Learning Curve: Kong offers a comprehensive set of features, but this can make it more complex to set up and configure. It requires a certain level of expertise to effectively use and manage Kong as an API gateway and service mesh. Linkerd, being lighter weight and more focused, has a smaller learning curve and can be easier to integrate into existing microservices architectures.

  5. Community and Support: Kong has a larger and more established community compared to Linkerd. With a larger user base and more contributors, Kong enjoys a wider range of community-supported plugins and extensions. Linkerd, while growing in popularity, may have a more limited community and plugin ecosystem.

  6. Vendor and Commercial Support: Kong is backed by Kong Inc., a company that offers a commercial version with additional enterprise features and support. This can be beneficial for organizations looking for reliable commercial support and additional functionality. Linkerd, in comparison, is an open-source project primarily maintained by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) without a direct commercial entity backing it.

In summary, Kong is a robust API gateway and service mesh solution that operates as a standalone system, while Linkerd is a lightweight, sidecar-based service mesh focused on observability and reliability. Kong offers more extensibility and customization options, but has a steeper learning curve, while Linkerd is simpler to integrate but with a narrower set of features. Each solution has its strengths and best fits different use cases and deployment scenarios.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Kong, linkerd

Prateek
Prateek

Fullstack Engineer| Ruby | React JS | gRPC at Ex Bookmyshow | Furlenco | Shopmatic

Mar 14, 2020

Decided

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.

322k views322k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kong
Kong
linkerd
linkerd

Kong is a scalable, open source API Layer (also known as an API Gateway, or API Middleware). Kong controls layer 4 and 7 traffic and is extended through Plugins, which provide extra functionality and services beyond the core platform.

linkerd is an out-of-process network stack for microservices. It functions as a transparent RPC proxy, handling everything needed to make inter-service RPC safe and sane--including load-balancing, service discovery, instrumentation, and routing.

Logging: Log requests and responses to your system over TCP, UDP or to disk; OAuth2.0: Add easily an OAuth2.0 authentication to your APIs; Monitoring: Live monitoring provides key load and performance server metrics; IP-restriction: Whitelist or blacklist IPs that can make requests; Authentication: Manage consumer credentials query string and header tokens; Rate-limiting: Block and throttle requests based on IP or authentication; Transformations: Add, remove or manipulate HTTP params and headers on-the-fly; CORS: Enable cross-origin requests to your APIs that would otherwise be blocked; Anything: Need custom functionality? Extend Kong with your own Lua plugins;
Adaptive load-balancing;Fine-grained instrumentation;Abstractions over service discovery;Runtime traffic routing;Tech that's built for scale
Statistics
GitHub Stars
42.1K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
5.0K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
671
Stacks
132
Followers
1.5K
Followers
312
Votes
139
Votes
7
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 37
    Easy to maintain
  • 32
    Easy to install
  • 26
    Flexible
  • 21
    Great performance
  • 7
    Api blueprint
Pros
  • 3
    CNCF Project
  • 1
    Fast Integration
  • 1
    Service Mesh
  • 1
    Pre-check permissions
  • 1
    Light Weight
Integrations
Cassandra
Cassandra
Docker
Docker
Prometheus
Prometheus
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
PostgreSQL
PostgreSQL
NGINX
NGINX
Vagrant
Vagrant
No integrations available

What are some alternatives to Kong, linkerd?

Istio

Istio

Istio is an open platform for providing a uniform way to integrate microservices, manage traffic flow across microservices, enforce policies and aggregate telemetry data. Istio's control plane provides an abstraction layer over the underlying cluster management platform, such as Kubernetes, Mesos, etc.

Amazon API Gateway

Amazon API Gateway

Amazon API Gateway handles all the tasks involved in accepting and processing up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent API calls, including traffic management, authorization and access control, monitoring, and API version management.

Tyk Cloud

Tyk Cloud

Tyk is a leading Open Source API Gateway and Management Platform, featuring an API gateway, analytics, developer portal and dashboard. We power billions of transactions for thousands of innovative organisations.

Azure Service Fabric

Azure Service Fabric

Azure Service Fabric is a distributed systems platform that makes it easy to package, deploy, and manage scalable and reliable microservices. Service Fabric addresses the significant challenges in developing and managing cloud apps.

Moleculer

Moleculer

It is a fault tolerant framework. It has built-in load balancer, circuit breaker, retries, timeout and bulkhead features. It is open source and free of charge project.

Express Gateway

Express Gateway

A cloud-native microservices gateway completely configurable and extensible through JavaScript/Node.js built for ALL platforms and languages. Enterprise features are FREE thanks to the power of 3K+ ExpressJS battle hardened modules.

ArangoDB Foxx

ArangoDB Foxx

It is a JavaScript framework for writing data-centric HTTP microservices that run directly inside of ArangoDB.

Dapr

Dapr

It is a portable, event-driven runtime that makes it easy for developers to build resilient, stateless and stateful microservices that run on the cloud and edge and embraces the diversity of languages and developer frameworks.

Zuul

Zuul

It is the front door for all requests from devices and websites to the backend of the Netflix streaming application. As an edge service application, It is built to enable dynamic routing, monitoring, resiliency, and security. Routing is an integral part of a microservice architecture.

Jersey

Jersey

It is open source, production quality, framework for developing RESTful Web Services in Java that provides support for JAX-RS APIs and serves as a JAX-RS (JSR 311 & JSR 339) Reference Implementation. It provides it’s own API that extend the JAX-RS toolkit with additional features and utilities to further simplify RESTful service and client development.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

Postman
Swagger UI

Postman vs Swagger UI

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp