Akamai API Gateway vs. Mashery (now part of Boomi)

It is really helpful for managing [the] scaling of systems with need and utilizing resources when needed. Also, DevOps support for deployment plans is quite useful when deploying applications. Monitoring systems with graphQL and utilizing them in APIs is quite helpful when used in Microservices systems to identify system capabilities and user utilization of applications.

Incentivized

Mashery is great when it comes to deployment to your own datacenter and when it comes to managing third party API's like Salesforce using Mashery Cloud version. I would be a little bit more careful when deploying it on Kubernetes as it was not designed for it. New version 5 is re-architected to run more on natively on Kubernetes, but we have not tested it yet.

Incentivized

• Graphically representation in GraphQL
• Scaling system
• DevOps management

Incentivized

• Easy integration of the TIBCO Cloud Mashery developer portal allows simple onboarding and user and application management.
• Configuration of TIBCO Cloud Mashery is both flexible and focused to address the main tasks for an API Management solution.
• The built-in OAuth Token capabilities provide a quick start to properly manage application access.

Incentivized

• Quota enforcement can be simplified
• Caching mechanism for API with akamai can be improved
• Gateway configuration can be simplified as details are not much elaborate

Incentivized

• The "Control Center" admin dashboard is not performant. We have a lot of configuration data in Mashery (many endpoints, many plans, many users, many keys, etc.) and the website struggles with the volume of data it has to deal with.
• Their systems have limitations that make it more difficult for us to operate the way we would like. For example, there is a limit to the number of API Definitions we can create, as well as a limit to the number of Endpoints we can define in a Plan.
• Their support organization leaves a lot to be desired. Responses are slow, and when they do come they are often inadequate. We have to re-phrase the question to get them to answer it differently, or we have to repeatedly follow up to ask for additional clarifying information.

Incentivized

Ease of use.

Incentivized

i find some of the package adding and key are complex . UI experience is bad . Every step need front and backward navigation too much. It would be better if endpoint itself contain package and key addiction option

Incentivized

Support has been good overall.

Incentivized

Initially it was difficult to understand . after few day , it was easy

Incentivized

Akamai [API Gateway] helps better in terms of representation of graphQL and its consumption in monitoring system making a package for deployment speed with monitoring and scaling application with all services and utilizing most of a system without much knowledge of other aspects. Also, [a] user-friendly system helps people to handle [the] system with necessary options

Incentivized

I've really only looked at Mashery since it has been around a very long time and has a rich feature set. I do know our platform teams are looking into AWS gateway but not sure this product has everything we need.

Incentivized

• Decrease in time required for deployment and monitoring by significant amount causing less support resources needed
• Scaling applications on month-end at high usage time has reduced TAT time for issues and no of issues occurring
• Quota enforcement has allowed [managing] multiple systems and their needs in respective stakeholders hands and reduced infra teams involvement in [the] management of reoccurring problems

Incentivized

• As a API Mediation layer it has helped with the troublesome port setup with internal and external clients. Meaning it made that easy to the client that they know where to go for access to an API.
• The interactive documentation is very well put together and has reduced the time that developers have to go back and forth with each other to figure how to call the API.

Incentivized