IBM API Connect Reviews

One valuable feature of IBM API Connect is its role differentiation between API publishers and consumers. Publishers can easily identify, create, and publish APIs on the developer portal, defining plans, packages, and potentially billing rules. Consumers, interested in specific API packages, can subscribe, and use the APIs, and the platform tracks usage meticulously, allowing accurate billing applications for API consumers based on their usage patterns.

The platform’s integration with the payment gateway needs enhancement. The setup process and support services could be improved.

We have been using IBM API Connect for three to five years.

It is a stable product. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

It is a scalable product. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

We encounter challenges related to the availability of local support and time zones.

We used another product for API management. However, there were several areas of improvement related to the availability of a knowledgeable and skilled support team.

The initial setup is complicated for container deployment. It is easy to maintain. I rate the process an eight out of ten.

We use the platform’s analytics feature for extracting reporting for billing purposes. It is a good feature. It offers a sandbox environment where users, such as developers or testers, can interact with and test various APIs.

In the subscription process, EVOFRO (Evaluate, Offer, Verify, Fulfill, Render, Operate) is involved, specifically during the consumer's subscription attempt. It triggers a flow that includes reviewing and approving the subscription. It helps us achieve 80% compliance with regulations for our company.

I advise customers to identify the use cases before purchasing the product. I rate it an eight out of ten.

It offers enhanced security features to protect APIs, enforce access control, and secure sensitive data. It also works as a powerful integration tool for the internal and external transmission zone, allowing us to connect with different vendors easily.

There is room for improvement regarding the connectivity of the DevOps.

I have been using it for three years. 

The solution provides high stability. I would rate it nine out of ten.

It is designed to handle large-scale API operations, so it ensures high scalability. I would rate it nine out of ten. 

They are lacking in terms of customer service and technical support. I would rate it six out of ten. 

Neutral

The initial setup is easy. It is based on available courses and steps that are comprehensive and helpful.

The deployment process is facilitated and fast. It takes about an hour for the solution to be deployed.

The pricing is significantly high. I would rate it eight out of ten.

IBM API Connect is a really good API management solution that offers a variety of benefits and advantages such as rapid development tools and enhanced productivity. I would rate it nine out of ten.

We use this solution in a hybrid way. All the processes and data is in the cloud but the API gateway is part of the API Connect solution and runs on prem in Argentina, connected to the cloud.

The management of the API and API portal is good. 

The monetization of the API could be improved. The pricing for the consumer is also very important to improve this solution. Nowadays, we are sending information to other tool in order to process out of API Connect. They could improve this internal service in order to have the balance for the consumer's API for different companies, external to our company.

I have been using this solution for three years. 

This is a strong and stable solution. 

The initial setup is complex. When setting it up, you will need support. We are using AVP support from IBM. Its an extra support service. I would recommend using this kind of support because it will help your company move quickly in order to set up the different products. IBM AVP stands for accelerated value program.

I would rate this solution a nine out ten. 

My customers are using IBM API Connect for integration in the financial sector.

The most valuable feature of IBM API Connect is the security of the protocol.

IBM API Connect could improve the security of the application and the integration.

I have been using IBM API Connect for approximately five years.

We have seven users using IBM API Connect and plan to increase the usage.

The technical support from IBM API Connect is good.

I rate the support from IBM API Connect a five out of five.

Positive

We pay for the IBM API Connect monthly. We only need to pay the standard licensing fee.

I rate IBM API Connect an eight out of ten.

API Connect is mainly used as a gateway solution to expose, secure, and manage APIs. 

Using API Connect allows us to quickly create proxy APIs and saves time on end-to-end testing, which lets us deliver quickly to clients.

API Connect's most valuable features are API management and creation.

The developer portal could be easier to customize - as it's Drupal-based, I have to hire a Drupal developer to do it for me. I feel there should be a drag-and-drop or UI-based configuration to customize the developer portal. In the next release, I would like some support for file uploads and MQ integration.

I've been using API Connect for six years.

The newer versions, from 2018 forwards, are quite stable.

API Connect is scalable because it's completely containerized.

IBM's technical support is very good.

The initial setup was straightforward, and deployment took two days.

I did the implementation myself.

I would say that if you want stability and security, you should go for API Connect. It's a very robust product that lets you easily create and manage your API. I would rate API Connect as nine out of ten.

We provide social security services (nonprofit) to our tenants and their customers.

Our goal with an API gateway is to separate our own clients in our extranet from the server implementations. We want to provide a unique point-of-contact for the client application(s) while having several server components at the backend side.

Furthermore, we need a single-sign-on solution and mapping of services.

Everything needs to run an OpenShift 4.x private cloud with no (or very restricted) access to the internet.

Unfortunately, this solution resulted (at least for us) in more problems than expected. We had severe installation and upgrade issues (maybe due to the nature of our network which is closed to the outside). One of those upgrades took, including problem solving, three people three weeks. Luckily, this was not in production, but if it would have been, we would be lost. This is the main reason for choosing another solution.

Also within the specific version, a map operator was missing (which was needed) - so we would need to write mappings on our own in JavaScript.

When API Connect is running, it is a stable solution (just do not change it).

Also, managing products and catalogs was helpful and it would be helpful for (as in our case) companies that need to run a multi-tenant concept. 

The developer portal is based on Drupal which is in itself very powerful. The service provider view and the consumer view are totally separated (however - the look and feel are also different).

From a starter perspective, using OpenShift, the operators to install are all there.

The statistics component is easy to use. You get your information at your fingertip.

Installation is weak. We (three people) ran into so many problems that I would, as an engineering manager, give this back to the development team. 

Too many secrets (even if they are set by default, we had problems).

The big footprint of pods, a complex network of them. This should be simplified.

To me, the product looks over-engineered. On the other hand, documentation needs more examples, this is "under-engineered".

They need to provide debugging facility for service implementations and policies (see gravitee.io for an example)

I've used the solution for one year.

Although we had our problems, I would say it is very scalable. 

Technical support is too slow.

Neutral

We did not previously use something else.

We took on API Connect although it was not Number One on our shortlist as we had a large contract with IBM which includes also this product.

The initial setup was too complex (we had problems).

We worked with a certified external consultant company.

Be sure you do not run into installation or upgrade issues. 

Our problems here were caused by our closed environments, however, still, it is in the dark of the systems where the problems are.

We also looked at:

• MuleSoft
• Kong
• Gravitee
• KrankenD
• WSO2

People should also consider support. We had several times to contact the support, and quite often we got a response after some days of the kind "please send this or that additional information". This does not help to solve quickly.

We use IBM API Connect for external communication with outside partners and external companies doing business with our company. 

This solution is deployed on-premises. We are currently using Version 5.0, but we are upgrading to version 10.0, which is a cloud-based solution. 

One of the most valuable features of this solution is that it protects our backend system. We are exposing services to external parties and using this solution to protect the backend system, and to have a navigation in between. 

The installation process could use improvement. I hope that in the next release, the installation process is easier. 

My company has used this solution for at least four years. 

There have been some internal issues within the product that have caused instability.

This solution is scalable. 

API Connect is not straightforward to install. If you don't have a lot of dependencies in your organization, it will take a short amount of time. In our case, we took at least a month because of dependencies to other departments in the company. 

For our technical team, we have approximately 10 people, a combination of managers, admins, and engineers. 

We provide this solution to customers. 

There aren't any additional costs for the consumer solution. There is no cost for the consumers to use the services because we don't monetize the services. 

We have plans to upgrade from this solution. We are upgrading to ensure that we have a supported version late next year, in November or December, and are evaluating alternative solutions in the market. 

I rate API Connect a seven out of ten. This solution is stable, but maybe not the most modern product on the market. 

My clients mainly use API Connect as an API gateway. A lot of the backend services need to be exposed to other parties, mobile devices, interfaces, etc. 

API Connect's most valuable feature is its ability to act as a gateway. It's very easy to configure security and everything else in it. You don't have to kill yourself implementing custom configurations. Sometimes the customer wants to incorporate their identity provider, and API Connect handles that without any problems. 

One thing about API Connect that could be improved is the security schemes. There are so many security schemes, and from a product perspective, IBM could improve the user experience of the configuration security scheme. It does what it is supposed to do, but it could be easier to configure. The junior developers sometimes find it a bit confusing to configure even though they understand the concept.

And another thing is that I don't know the security policies that we have. For instance, we have a service account, which is needed to connect to some other services. So in those cases, I find it a bit hard to tweak things in the API gateway. And one could argue that it is not the right thing to do with the API gateway. It has a different place to be, which could be why they haven't put it there. But sometimes, you have to tweak around that, and I find it a little bit hard to do that. So if they could accommodate that in there, it would be better for some people.

I've been using it for the last four years on and off. The last time I deployed it was a few months ago.

API Connect is reliable.

API Connect is scalable, but I've found that everything is more stable if you reset the server every 40 or 45 days. Once, we had an incident in which we were unsure about what happened, but it crashed after 60 days. We didn't know the reason. It could've been a mistake in the product implementation. We don't know what happened, but this particular incident occurred two times. After that, we began restarting it every 45 days. So that's the resilience part, but the scalability part works without a problem.
Another thing is that we don't know all of the use cases that we have worked on before, so we didn't go for automatic scaling of the API gateway. That's done in the backend services. So I'll be honest to say that we haven't explored the auto-scalability of API Connect much. Instead, we put that on full throttle. This can cause a bottleneck if we play around with it, so we didn't take many risks. We put that on full throttle and did the tweaking in the backend services. That's how we did it in the past.

I've interacted with IBM support many times. They're good. They get back to you within 12 or 14 hours after you initiate a ticket. IBM support will get on a call with you if needed and guide you. It's no problem. They provide the same level of support to everyone. 

Setting up API Connect is a straightforward process. Maybe it seems more manageable because I've been taking baby steps rolling it out for the last few years. So when we talk about the latest version, it's not a headache if you follow the documentation. Even for an operations person, it's a piece of cake. 

It takes a minimal amount of time to deploy as a product. Including the processes for the organization, installing the product could take half a day. And when we ask the Ops team to do it, it usually takes half a day for them to do it. They have to document the IP and keep a log of what they're doing. 

API Connect itself does not require any maintenance. But when our teams write the business logic into it, that usually requires some support and maintenance. So a team of two people looks after the whole setup. And they work in shifts. Usually, it works on an onshore-offshore model. So one person from the onshore team will be supporting it for some time, and when he goes off, the other person comes up. 

API Connect's license cost could be a little lower. But, unfortunately, there aren't many open-source API gateways. Ideally, some new developers could come up with a minimum-functionality open-source solution. When I look for open-source resources that work with API C or Apigee, I find very few that can do that. It's not available or very popular in the open-source community. I've only worked with large companies that are capable of affording these licenses.  A better option for smaller companies might be to have two or three developers build a custom API gateway. That might be more affordable for them.

I rate API Connect seven out of 10. I would recommend it to customers if they have the money to pay for it, but it depends on the ecosystem. So, as a consultant, I would recommend API Connect if the customer already has an IBM license. Big companies generally have IBM middleware running somewhere, so they might have a license for these things. In cases like this, we would usually recommend API Connect for their purposes rather than spending more money on a different product. And if a client is building something entirely new and has to get a new license, we'll compare the options, including Apigee, MuleSoft, API C, or a custom solution.