WSO2 Enterprise Integrator Reviews

A typical use case for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is when I am in an interoperability environment with healthcare facilities and I have to put together a lot of applications that share some HL7 messages or FHIR service. This is the environment.

The best features of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, besides microservices integration or management, usually include applications that use microservices, built with microservices, so REST services are used if possible, when they have these capabilities.

In terms of integration capability, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator does overall processing and transforming of data. Sometimes we have to make some work with the transformation of HL7 messages in a bundle of FHIR resources, for example. This kind of transformation is quite useful usually. Another situation is typical when we have to put together some application that does not work in a very coordinated way originally, but we have to try to make them work in some kind of workflow that has some business meaning, not only technical meaning. Because sometimes they do some work, but they are not very well related with other applications that are around in the same environment.

WSO2 Enterprise Integrator provides me with some sort of analytic capabilities or monitoring tools, but the analytic is quite a complex task because it is not so difficult to collect data from different sources, but the usual problem is that in the healthcare environment, we have tons of data. So millions of data points. The number of data is quite huge. This is a concern, obviously. The very difficult task is to find some way to put the information together because usually, using CDR or some other kind of repository, HL7 repository, IHI compliant, and something similar, we have the problem that they are not suited, they are not able to manage this kind of huge amount of information. So it is quite impossible to manage the analytic data in this kind of environment. We have to choose something different and to put them in connection with the repository.

Something that could be improved in WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is that the problem is not a lack of capability or functionalities. The problem is that it is a very complex environment. To put your hand on this environment is a very demanding task. This is the real problem. The problem is not about the product, but about the complexity to manage, to configure, to decide what to do. I have some experience using SAP R/3. It seems to me something similar. When you have to configure a situation with a client, especially for a client not in an industrial sector, but in a service sector, it is quite usual that you are in trouble for some reason. This is always the story that I found in the implementations I have done. Maybe there are only three or four big problems, in some other cases there are more than that, but this is the situation usually. For WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, not the same, but I must say it is quite often there is a need to put together some pieces and make it work in a coordinated way.

The deployment process for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is not exactly easy because it is a quite huge platform. In other situations, we use other kinds of much simpler environments such as Camel or others.

If I had to deploy WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for a complex task, it usually takes months, not days or weeks. It is not possible to complete it in a couple of days because you have to put together all the software involved in integration, specification, tests, and everything else.

Regarding stability, I have never faced any sort of big issues regarding security breaches with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. The security is a huge problem. But usually, we manage the problem of security by design. We decided that some kind of database must be created and some other communication has to use some JSC token to be shared to guarantee that the communications are not vulnerable, or maybe use HTTPS for other communication and so on. In healthcare, this is obviously a big issue.

WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is a cost-effective tool. Also, others, such as Camel or other solutions, are more or less open source or similar. But the cost is not related to providing the product, but the cost is related to developing the capabilities to manage the tool and to install, to configure and so on. So this is not a direct cost in a certain way.

For simpler tasks or simpler use cases, we avoid using WSO2 Enterprise Integrator because it is quite complex. So it is easier to manage some more simple solutions than that.

WSO2 Enterprise Integrator supports different deployment models, such as on-prem and on-cloud, but it is difficult to answer this question because in the past, this was quite often on-premise. In the last five years, the situation has changed because there is a national informatic environment that was decided by the government and all the public healthcare companies are more or less obliged in the future to migrate on this centralized environment that is in a cloud situation. The trend is to go in a cloud environment. The problem is that this environment, as usually here in Italy, is very buggy and full of problems of any kind. When you go there, you have no problem in your normal environment. You go there, you are full of problems immediately.

Regarding support of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, I must say that I have never used the direct support from Colombo, directly from the producer of the package. But there are some companies in Italy that give some help with this. I know many people, so I usually use some kind of local support. But it is not related to the producer, so it is not an official WSO2 support. It is a company that has built expertise over some years from some implementations and so on. It is much easier to address the problem using this kind of capability than to go to escalation. For other situations, I open a ticket, we produce, we exchange many emails with all the details, problems, configuration, environment, and so on. But at the end, usually, we are able to solve the problem.

I would rate WSO2 Enterprise Integrator nine out of ten from a functional viewpoint, very high. About the complexity instead, it is very difficult to manage. So from the complexity viewpoint, it is a low value. From the capabilities and functional possibility and anything else technical, it is a very well-done product, I have to say. It is really difficult to build something similar from scratch. It needs capability and resources and so on that are very difficult to put together. It is not easy to find something else with the same capability. In my opinion, I use other products such as Picasso or others. I use three, four, five, six, not only this one. In my opinion, it is by far the best, but the problem is the complexity.

The connectors have been the most impactful features for handling integrations. I can use these connectors when I need specific connectivity with a third party, like a core banking system in BFSI. I don't need to do all the development. I take the specific connector, put in the IP address and password, and it takes care of everything.

For example, there's a messaging connector for connecting to mail or SMS utilities. I just specify the server IP address, port, username, and password, and the connector has the relevant details. This helps with easy integration. My developer saves time as they don't need to write the whole module. Using the connector makes development faster.

The tool also provides a web-based tool, making it a no-code solution. I can use the WSO2 Enterprise Integrator GUI to design. I can specify which systems I'm using and define IP addresses and other details. It writes the code on the backend and handles the connectivity, simplifying the entire integration process.

I find the transformation and mediation capabilities useful. The basic transformation and mediation features are also available in the API manager. Most of the time, people need REST to SOAP and SOAP to REST conversions, which are available in the API manager.

We use the tool for more complex mediations. It's helpful for handling images or multipart transfers, like transferring large files or PDFs. However, in some cases, we've handled large file transfers differently. Instead of using multipart through it, we share the file as a link. The user clicks the link, and the big file opens in a different browser window.

It is only required for very complex setups when the use case can't be met with the normal API manager. That's when we go with advanced transformation and mediation.

WSO2 Enterprise Integrator has influenced cost savings and efficiency in my customers' projects. It decreases the development timeframe, which is the most important factor. Implementing things in a timely manner reduces costs on the implementation and project management side.

While we have to factor in some additional costs for subscription and support, the product gives us good advantages. The developers are more comfortable and able to do things faster with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. However, it really depends on the business requirements. If the requirements are complex enough to need the tool, then we use it. We don't need WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for simple mediation and transformation requirements - we can use API Manager and some open-source code.

The product is necessary for very complex banking requirements or heavy requirements where a lot of these features are used. In most of our implementations, we've mainly used REST APIs provided by the customer. If there's a lot of SOAP involved, then some WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is definitely required.

I'm very satisfied with the performance. It's a very high-performance system. It requires very few cores and the license cost is reasonable. It's a very high-performing product. You can easily reach up to 1000 TPS with just a single or two-core license.

The main issue with the product is pricing. It uses core-based pricing for WSO2 Enterprise Integrator and API Manager. It would be best if you had APIM by default. It provides many connectors for easy integration with third-party systems.

Often, customers decide to develop using open-source tools like Spring Boot if there aren't many connectors required to avoid increasing costs. They'll develop this way and then deploy using APIM, the bare minimum needed.

It is mainly required for very complicated setups with many connectors. In the implementations I've seen, people often used open-source tools because there weren't many third-party systems involved—just their organization's own systems.

From WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, I expect them to bring up more and more connectors in the future. That's the main expectation. Having more connectors in various areas will help us when discussing new requirements. I don't have any specific use case right now, so I can't name a particular connector.

But, as new technologies emerge, the relevant connectors should be there for those. WSO2 Enterprise Integrator mainly helps with the integration part, which can be simplified only if you have relevant connectors for whatever you're doing.

The tool's support is good and comes directly from OEM. 

Positive

Before becoming a WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, I worked with 3scale. While it technically fulfilled the requirements, it was more complicated and not easy to use. Everyone couldn't easily handle it. With WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, anybody can easily work with it after a little training.

I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten. Integration is very custom, not standard. If a particular use case requires connectors that are available in the WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, then it's very good for that project. They have more than 2000 connectors, and they're increasing. So 80-90% of the time, it will definitely meet any requirements. Maybe five to ten percent might be missing. But when you raise that with the OEM, they're very supportive and will come up with additional connectors.

My company has a very minimal in-house software development team to develop some mobile applications and workflow integrations.

WSO2 API Manager can be described as one of the valuable features that is attached to WSO2 Enterprise Integrator.

Our company requires every feature in the product. The IDE, the development-related areas, some of the integrations with multiple applications, reporting, dashboards, APIs, and security are some of the areas in the product that are valuable for my company. Customers mostly want an end-to-end API-related solution. The customer wants the product to offer open-source protocols. I believe that WSO2 Enterprise Integrator is a part of an open-source community.

The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required.

There is a need to improve on the product's security aspect when it comes to WSO2 Enterprise Integrator.

The IDE part can be better in the product.

I have experience with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for a few months. My company started to use the product due to a requirement for the tool from one of our customers. My company has a partnership with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. My organization also offers system integrators for the product.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My company's clients where the product is used are mostly enterprise-sized companies.

The product is scalable. I rate the product's scalability a nine out of ten.

The solution's technical support is very knowledgeable. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward. I rate the product's initial setup phase a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is a difficult process, and ten is an easy process, if compared to the setup phases of other OEMs like IBM and TIBCO.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in a few months.

I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price.

My company is aware of API management solutions, like TIBCO and IBM. My company recommends WSO2 Enterprise Integrator to our customers.

My company's customer base is located in India, and they want to integrate their multiple applications. Some of my company's customers have around 230 applications, and they want to have all these applications integrated through APIs.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

We use it for creating web service applications and MQs in various projects such as OberDx, digital importing, and the banking sector. I also use MQs and the administrator application for various tasks.

The solution has two main parts: integration and transformation. It's very user-friendly and easy to understand for everyone. When we talk about MQ, we can save any type of message, such as a string or JSON, in the memory. 

The second thing is the compute node, which is useful for security purposes as it allows us to transform into other languages or call specific functions. It's very helpful for us.

There is room for improvement in the administration side of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. It is complex. This area is often overlooked but has great potential to enhance the solution's functionality. Making significant improvements to the administrative part, it could make the integration process smoother and easier for users. 

I have been using this solution for five years. I have worked on many projects on versions nine, ten, and eleven. These three versions are very similar, and there is not much difference between them.

The stability is six out of ten. 

If the system requires a maximum of 4GB RAM, we can easily install and use the integration server, mP applications, and MQ Explorer. We can establish and use the integration without any issue with 4GB RAM.

In my opinion, the scalability of WSO2 integration is a six out of ten. In my five years and four months of IT experience, I've managed to handle various scenarios with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, making it relatively easy for me to handle its scalability.

The initial setup is not difficult if you have prior experience.

I've worked with Versions 9 and 10, converted to Version 10, and now working with 11 and 12. It's a bit confusing between versions 10 and 11. Still, we made language transformations, such as using the compute node and MQ nodes, into web services that work easily in REST web services, MQ Web Services, and shared libraries. Shared libraries are significant because they have half our needed functions. I like Version 10 because it was really easy to work. 

Moreover, the deployment process depends on the requirements. If we consume only one service and the requirement is normal, then it takes only one day to deploy. We can get all the group requirements and deploy the service in Unity. If we want to plan for production, we can give them a timeline of one day.

We can set it up easily on our own, as we have a good understanding of the concept. It usually takes us just one or two days to understand and get it running. So, if we have a good concept, it's very easy for us to set up WSO2.

There are some simple steps involved in the deployment process. First, we need to gather all the requirements and transformations and then consume the web service. After that, we export the integration along with the web service. We can also import this application and convert the version if necessary. Finally, we can deploy the entire thing on the integration server.

I would rate the pricing model three on a scale of one to ten, where one is a high price, and ten is a low price. It's higher than normal, but it's still manageable.

IBM Integration Bus and WSO2 Integration have some differences between them. IBM Integration Bus is a good and easy-to-understand product that is widely used. On the other hand, WSO2 Integration is also a good product, but not many people believe that it is suitable for large systems. 

Our system is quite huge, and we prefer IBM Integration Bus for its reliability. WSO2 Integration is a decent product, but it may not be suitable for all types of uses.

In the starting phase, the process is the same, like integration and data thinking, and observation. In WSO, we proceed with managing the whole requirement and setup. We cannot manage the coding, but we can manage the steps. 

So, if you want to make any type of application, first, you need to open our platform, choose the bar, select the application, and put your effort into it. It's a simple process, but it's a preference, sir. It's a different way.

Overall, I would rate WSO2 Enterprise Integrator a seven out of ten.  While WSO2 is easy to use, it cannot handle certain tasks that their AWS server requires. For example, IBM Integration Bus can handle 1000 clients in one second, whereas WSO2 cannot handle the whole scenario in a good way. It is a good product overall but has room for improvement in certain areas.

The banks and government entities use this solution.

WSO2 Enterprise Integrator facilitates the integration of different systems and the exposure of services within an IT ecosystem. It has functionalities such as service exposure and consumption from other entities.

WSO2's analytics capability is good, considering the ELC support they provide. They have an offering for the cloud. Mostly, ELC serves the right purpose.

WSO2 Enterprise Integrator can standardize integration processes within organizations. Many customers rely on it for its robust standardization capabilities, making it a crucial component in their integration strategies.

The key feature of API management is conversion. This integration module facilitates tasks such as converting between various formats and connecting diverse data stores.

The micro integrator should be improved. There is room for enhancement considering alternative integration components. Some workloads may benefit from optimization or additional features. Additionally, exploring the supported connections reveals opportunities for enhancement. While some connections may meet expectations, others may require workarounds due to limitations such as bandwidth availability. From a product perspective, there could be improvements by incorporating built-in connectors that are aligned with industry standards.

I have been using WSO2 Enterprise Integrator as an implementor for over five years.

The product is stable.

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

The microservices architecture is best. We can scale it depending on our requirements. It is very scalable. The solution is well-fit for enterprise customers.

I rate the solution’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The documentation is efficient. The deployment takes minutes in the production phase.

I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

The product has reasonable and competitive pricing for enterprise customers. It is expensive for small businesses especially. They are using the open-source solution, and they find it expensive since it has a subscription.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use the solution to transfer data from different formats, like XML to JSON, and orchestrate the solution and put it in a message block. 

Since we have already built all the systems, WSO2 helps us to make the software compatible with each other. WSO2 makes those systems work together like a team. This has allowed us to consult the data and endpoints, reach out to the message and transform it. 

It's a very complete product. It allows us to network security and add more layers of security to the system. It can also help us to change the message routine.

One of the weaknesses is that sometimes a signature is needed to make it work according to your requirements, and therefore properly support the system. It can be very expensive.

They should introduce better pricing for small companies.

I have been using WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for two and half-three years.

The solution is stable and it is a mature program. People have been working on the project and simultaneously contributing the freeware. But there are a lot of bugs, and the capability to customize the WSO. As time has passed, WSO2 has turned out to be very mature. We don't have so many bugs compared to the earlier version and it is working better than ever.     

WSO2 is very scalable. It can easily be scaled using cabinets and other accessories. 

I haven’t personally contacted the WSO2'scustomer service and support for the enterprise integrator. My clients directly communicate with the WSO2 support, since they use it as freeware. However, I've already heard people complaining about the accents but I haven't tried directly to reach them.

I have already done a presentation about MuleSoft that works similarly but is a bit lighter and has much better data control. It also gives you the option of data analysis and metrics to show whether the API is working or not. I think it is a new software in terms of governance. They are very similar and there isn’t much to expect with regard to their differences.

The initial setup is neither easy nor difficult, and the installer should have appropriate knowledge about the process. It took almost three days because I was new to the job and was researching the process.

I have worked with the infrastructure of the system in the cloud. We built a cluster with two or more computers and made it scalable and safe, making the machines visualized on the cloud using AWS.

I did the installation by myself, helped by a mentor-friend. He guided me through the process since I was new to the profile. The setup only involved two people.

This product is more like an accelerator, which helps your business go fast. These are among very few solutions available for security purposes, in terms of banking accelerators and other enterprises. If you want to accelerate your products and business, WSO2 Enterprise Integrator can be a good solution. It is organic and makes everything visually easy to understand and operate.

Overall, I would rate the product a nine out of ten.

Our needs are mainly focused on the ESB side. We use the product to fill our enterprise service bus scenarios or needs.

The usage has been very good. It's more than sufficient. 

It's a stable product.

There is a minor need to improve the ease of configuration. The configuration of the product is not an easy task for everyone. I agree that it has to be that way, as it's a good technology, however, maybe for people with low experience it can be hard. There can be a higher learning curve.

The setup can be difficult for those not familiar with the solution. 

I'd like to see the possibility of configuring the product via consoles with more elasticity without having the need to go to the single files in the file system, add the files manually, and then restarting. We'd like to make some changes, some tuning of the product, using the administration console. If this is extended to the console, it would be great. We need more operations done by the console. It simplifies the life of the worker.

I've used the solution since 2015. It's been a while. Around seven years. 

There's nothing to say about the stability. It has been reliable and fine. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We use an architecture that does not have many nodes. We use at most four nodes at a time. In our scenario, everything fulfills our expectations. We don't scale much. 

Technical support is very good. We occasionally have contact with them and they always answer in a very short amount of time.

While the initial setup is quite linear, it is not for everyone. I see people that often go into a panic. Usually, if they have a lack of experience in other fields, or in other integrated technologies, it makes them nervous. 

I am the team leader for the management of the product at the client. So, I represent my company to the client. We have a team of about six people that can handle deployment and maintenance.

We handled the implementation ourselves in-house. We did not need any integrators or consultants. 

The solution costs about 20,000 or 30,000 euros per year, per instance. That is my understanding. It is the client that actually pays for the license. There are no extra costs above and beyond the standard licensing fee. 

We're partners. 

I've used, from the very beginning, the fourth version. Now I'm using the 6.5 version. 

I've been pleased with the solution. It's a consolidated product. It works and it does its job pretty well.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

It is used for orchestrating APIs and exposing arrays. For instance, let's say they have some self-service down screens where they need to fetch multiple data from multiple servers and present it to our server in a uniform JSON format. That's the main purpose for which they use it. I am currently working with a telco.

In the telco industry, for example, when someone wants to know their balance, they first check if the user exists and then retrieve the user's current balance. These are two separate endpoints from where this information is obtained. So, they use WSO2 Enterprise Integrator to perform the necessary checks in their database to determine if the user exists and then fetch the data. It involves orchestrating various endpoints and presenting the data uniformly to the caller or the client.

Currently, I find the configuration part quite valuable, where you can easily configure things. Additionally, the integration studio has significantly improved since we first used it. So, the integration studio is good, and the rest of the features are quite similar. I don't think it's very different from any other ESB or EAI.

WSO2 libraries are not mature enough. For example, if you want to integrate with Kafka using its Kafka library, it often has many bugs. So, you have to report those bugs, and WSO2 will provide fixes. The support team is quite good, but the product's library maturity is lacking. When integrating with a new system, messaging queue, or database, you cannot trust it to work flawlessly in production. It will have bugs that the support team will fix the issue, but it will have bugs.

In additional features, it would be great if WSO2 improved its integration studio and provided better documentation. Currently, WSO2's documentation is very bad, and it would be helpful to have more comprehensive and reliable resources. If WSO2 addresses these aspects, it would greatly enhance the product. And also if WSO2 enhances its integration studio. WSO2 has made improvements, but there's still room for further enhancement.

I have been working with WSO2 since 2015 until 2018. I can say roughly three years. But I have also been working with it in my current company. They need to integrate some services, so I would like to use them for them as well. 

We are using EI 7.1.

I would rate it a seven, not more than that. While it's a good product, there are instances where unforeseen issues arise in production.

We have achieved scalability with it. You can scale it up as much as you want, but it comes with licensing costs. For example, if you want three instances, you need to purchase licenses for each instance, and so on.

The customer service and support team is very good. WSO2's technical support team is very good, especially if you are a subscriber of the support services. WSO2 provides excellent support and responds in a timely manner. 

The support comes bundled with the licensing. As far as I know, when you purchase their product, you receive a certain number of support hours. During those hours, you can ask any questions or request additional support and patches. It's all included in the subscription.

Positive

It was quite easy to deploy. We deployed it around ten times, and it was a smooth process. 

The process depends on the complexity of the deployment. For simpler deployments, it can be done within seconds without any downtime. However, for some patches or changes in the product, it may require restarting the whole server, which can take some time. But overall, the deployment of an API takes just a second with no downtime.

Since we deployed our own servers, we didn't require additional DevOps staff. We didn't implement any CICD pipeline either. We simply uploaded the product into our deployment directory, and it got deployed. Depending on the criticality of the API, one person or maybe two or three at most would handle the deployment. But usually, one person can handle the job.

WSO2's pricing is more reasonable compared to other similar solutions.

Always perform thorough testing before going into production because sometimes the APIs are not stable. It's important to validate your scenarios before production to avoid issues and disruptions in the APIs, especially in new integrations.

I would rate it around eight out of ten. I really appreciate the product because it's user-friendly and easy to develop with, once you grasp the basics. If you have a good understanding of its fundamentals, you can accomplish anything with it. It's a very good product in that regard.

We use WSO2 Enterprise Integrator in our center.

I am a consultant specializing in integrating Peoplesoft and SAP HAP with Eyebox using WSO2 Enterprise Integrator. I have written articles about this technology on my LinkedIn profile.

In my opinion, the most valuable aspect of this solution is its extensive range of adaptors and connectors. This feature holds significant importance and provides great value to users.

In my opinion, the administration model and interface, of Carbon, are lacking in terms of its features and user experience.

The most valuable feature of the WSO2 Enterprise Integrator, especially in the new version, is its enhanced capabilities for DevOps. This integration platform offers advanced features that greatly facilitate and streamline the DevOps processes.

I have been working with WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for seven years.

I have extensive experience in API management, including the use of WIS Virtual Integrator. Additionally, I have three years of experience in integration and cybersecurity integration with versions 3.6 and 7.0. I am also highly skilled in WSRQ API management.

In the new version, I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten.

I have plans to increase usage of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator due to its new and impressive products such as Clio and Paladina. These products are known for their reliability and stability, which makes them highly desirable for my future plans and projects.

The technical support is good. 

I would rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy.

In Brazil, the reality is deployments are on-premises.

I consider it a highly beneficial investment with significant returns for me.

And specifically, the new version has been particularly beneficial, especially for enterprises in Brazil. The use of the new version has proven to provide significant returns.

The pricing of WSO2 Enterprise Integrator for enterprise subscriptions can be considered expensive, especially from the perspective of someone who prefers open-source software. I believe that the costs associated with these subscriptions are relatively high.

I highly recommend this solution to anyone who is considering its use.

I would rate WSO2 Enterprise Integrator a nine out of ten.

I use the solution for two purposes. One is to build microservices to enable exposure of APIs, and the second is for implementing communication with backend systems. It helps in integrating business systems with business applications.

I haven't chosen the product, but my client has chosen it. I wouldn't say it's my favorite. My purpose is to enable integration between the front-end of user setup with the back-end data or business systems. Secondly, enabling integration with third parties or external applications.

WSO2 is investing in Gong and the enterprise industry, and they are also working on communication. WSO2 also enables integration between on-premise and cloud applications, which is better than their competitors.

In my opinion, all of their products come with a very expensive support model. Their business model has one license for product users and a different license for resellers. But the license can get expensive when any issues arise, and either troubleshooting or maintenance is needed, or there is a need for new packets.

In this way, they try to lock the clients in for three to five years. They make sure they have regular revenue coming in. It is not right from a client's or a user's perspective. Until the time we implement it for real usage, we couldn't see the actual issues with it. Once we find them, we have to wait for the package to be applied, and then there's a lot of back-and-forth communication. The process depends on the classes that are specifically applied because it is a product that is available across the market for anyone. So every supplier tries to get a general version for each one. Some of the security patches are not compatible with the older versions. So the client is forced to upgrade.

I have been using the solution for over four or five years.

I haven't seen major issues in terms of stability. It’s quite a stable product. In the updated version, if they get rid of the account manager it leads to exposure to a lot of traffic. The product is unable to maintain the traffic. There is a funnel applied through incident application to sort the traffic and protect the backend systems. But we haven’t tested the gateway itself for a very high volume. Thus, I wouldn’t be able to blindly rate it as an eight or nine out of ten, I will put it as a seven out of ten.

I don’t have any issues with scalability. I would rate scalability a six out of ten. My clients have 10-35 users, predominantly IT engineers using the solution. But scalability becomes an issue only when I'm scaling across on-premises and on-cloud. Let’s say I do the implementation on the cloud but for some reason such as scheduled maintenance or any other kind of incident, the implementation fails, I can’t scale over to on-premises. But, I will need to use a bespoke routine mechanism to route the traffic to the on-premises solution. Here, I can do an active-active implementation between the cloud and on-premises.

The customer service executives are very responsive, but then the support model and the commercials are cumbersome. It's not as easy. They are expensive for any upgrades or patches. The support model is expensive.

If I have to buy software, then it becomes expensive for me. The licensing model is based on servers or implementations. Because we supply and install the product, it doesn’t matter how many times we have rented or used the solution. They also seem to have the number of live environments as one of the licensing criteria.

It is a good product. However, I haven't been in touch with the most recent security patches. I don't have anything negative to say about the product. I would rate it as a six out of ten. There is a scope for improvement at the same time. I haven't used the product extensively enough to say that it is the best product.