kuma VS Kong

https://github.com/kumahq/kuma is an CNCF OSS service mesh for Kubernetes and VMs. We're a control plane on top of Envoy proxy. Very actively developed project, some big adopters in the community, and we've just refreshed all of our Good First Issues.

And not just "Kuma" : https://github.com/kumahq/kuma

Another important change to make is that when you create the cluster, change the Nodes in the "Default pool" to use the COS (not COS_CONTAINERD) image type. There are some underlying issues when using Kuma with GKE, as noted in this GitHub issue, and this is the currently recommended workaround. Otherwise, you will hit pod initializing issues that affect certificate provisioning.

Taking things to a broader level, Kuma is another platform agnostic-OSS solution for service mesh and microservice management – with control plane support of Kubernetes, virtual machines (VM), and even bare-metal environments. Kuma was donated to the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) by Kong and still actively contributes to the evolving code base.

Kuma Kuma, from Kong, prides itself on being a usable service mesh alternative. Kuma is a platform-agnostic control plane built on Envoy. Kuma provides networking features to secure, observe, route, and enhance connectivity between services. Kuma supports Kubernetes in addition to virtual machines.

Kong: A cloud-native, fast, scalable, and distributed Microservice Abstraction Layer (also known as an API Gateway or API Middleware). Made available as an open-source project in 2015, its core functionality is written in Lua and it runs on the nginx web server.

OPeNsOuRcE. Good time to switch to Kong, better option anyways.

Sounds like you want an API gateway? What about Kong?

Unquestionably no, Kong is "OpenResty plus a management plane" and they're Apache 2: https://github.com/kong/kong#license

Kong (https://konghq.com) | Gateway Senior Engineer | REMOTE Europe | Full-time

The Kong Gateway is an API Management solution, which serves as a foundation for many other solutions by the company. The business model is open-core: an Open Source solution exists (https://github.com/kong/kong), and there's an Enterprise version with more features and dedicated support.

The tech stack is a modified Openresty with of Lua code on top. The ideal candidate would be someone who is already familiar with Kong. Alternatively, if you are familiar with Openresty or other API management solution, we also would love to talk with you.

I am personally interested in finding people to join me in the European Gateway Team. The role involves adding features, fixing bugs, and collaborating with other teams. Here's that position:

https://jobs.lever.co/kong/c1a2b204-45a8-4c19-9cd4-d9824a778...

We have many projects and many teams all around the world (current headcount is ~450), using other technologies like Node in the Kong Manager or Go in the Koko project, and we are constantly looking for people. Please visit our careers page to find out more!

https://konghq.com/careers/

Kong Gateway allows the complexity of service-tier APIs to be reduced to a collection of endpoints (or URIs) focused on meeting a collection of business needs and functionality. Often-duplicated components (like authentication, logging, and security) are handled by the gateway and can be removed from the service-tier design.

I am seeing different companies taking different approach. I am not sure anymore where each should be actually used. On top of that tech like Kong make me question whether API Gateway should be one thing for all. Some perspective into this would be really appreciated.