Kong vs Traefik: which API gateway fits

Kong vs Traefik: when each one is the right choice

Choose Kong when your platform team must publish internal and partner APIs with per-consumer authentication, rate limits and API-level policy. Choose Traefik when the main job is routing traffic into Kubernetes or other orchestrated workloads, with certificates handled automatically and a smaller set of moving parts. Most of the difference comes down to whether you are managing API products or managing ingress. Kong fits when the API itself is the product. Its plugin model applies policy at the route, service or consumer level, and its authentication options include JWT, basic auth, OAuth and ACL on the open-source line. Teams that script gateway changes through the Admin API, or that need hybrid topologies with separate control and data planes, usually find Kong's operating model a better match. Traefik fits when teams want routes generated from orchestrator metadata, with Let's Encrypt certificates, including wildcards, issued without manual steps. It also suits platforms that want fewer components to operate, since Traefik ships as a single Go binary or an official Docker image.

The decision turns on three checks. First, list your API product requirements: consumer onboarding, per-key quotas, and whether partners need a developer portal. Second, confirm which controls you need from the open-source line. Kong's open-source releases stay on the 3.9 line, and its OpenID Connect plugin is an Enterprise tier plugin, so OIDC is not part of the open-source gateway. Third, confirm the commercial tier you need for OIDC or vendor support, and ask Kong and Traefik Labs what each tier includes in writing. Traefik Hub and Traefik Enterprise are separate commercial products, so confirm which one covers API management before you budget for it.

Which scenario favors which platform

This table maps common scenarios to the platform that fits them better and the condition that decides it. Read each row against your own traffic, team and licensing constraints, since several scenarios turn on whether a feature sits in the open-source line or a commercial tier. Kong is usually the stronger choice where per-consumer policy and plugins matter most, and Traefik where automatic routing and certificate handling matter most.

Scenario	Better fit	Condition that drives the choice
Kubernetes ingress only, no per-consumer policy	Traefik	Traefik discovers routes from Kubernetes Ingress, CRDs and the Gateway API without a database, so a plain ingress role needs less moving parts. Confirm which provider your cluster standard requires.
API products with per-consumer keys	Kong	Kong's open-source line includes key authentication and ACL plugins that map to consumers. Traefik can enforce auth middleware, but per-consumer product management is a stronger fit in Kong. Confirm the exact plugins against your key model.
OIDC-protected APIs	Depends on license	Kong's OpenID Connect plugin is Enterprise-tier, so it is not in the open-source gateway. Traefik OIDC support depends on the edition you run, so confirm with Traefik whether your required flow is in Proxy, Hub or Enterprise.
Certificate automation for many hostnames	Traefik	Traefik's built-in Let's Encrypt support includes wildcard certificates and updates without restarts. Kong certificate handling is workable but usually needs more configuration, so test renewal against your hostname count.
LLM or MCP traffic	Kong	Kong's README lists LLM and MCP gateway features. Confirm whether the features you need are in the open-source line or in Kong Gateway Enterprise before you commit to a design.
Teams with no API management staff	Traefik	Traefik's single binary and file or label-driven configuration are lighter to run without a dedicated gateway team. Kong adds a database in traditional mode, so the operating burden rises unless you choose DB-less or hybrid mode.
Commercial API management or support needed	Depends on vendor	Traefik Hub and Traefik Enterprise are commercial products on top of Traefik Proxy. Kong offers Kong Konnect and Enterprise tiers. Compare what each commercial tier includes against your required support and lifecycle features.

How Kong and Traefik are built and deployed

Kong and Traefik both sit in front of your services, but they keep state and configuration in different places. Kong is built around a gateway data store and declarative modes, while Traefik is a single binary that reads routes from the platform it runs on. The cards below cover what that difference means for upgrades, failure domains and day-two operations.

Kong's traditional mode

Traditional mode has every Kong node connect to a shared PostgreSQL database, so the database holds routes, services, plugins and consumers. Any node can serve traffic from the same state, but the database becomes a shared failure domain and a dependency for every change. Ask who runs the database, how it is backed up, and what happens to the gateway during a database outage before you choose this mode. The PostgreSQL Docker Compose quick start in the Kong repository uses this model and exposes ports 8000, 8001 and 8002.

Kong's DB-less mode

DB-less mode keeps the gateway configuration in memory, loaded from a declarative file, with no database to operate. This suits GitOps pipelines where the configuration file is the single source of truth and every change goes through review. The trade-off is that runtime changes made through the Admin API do not persist the way they do with a database, so teams must confirm how their change process and rollback work. Plugins and features that depend on a database should be checked against the mode before you commit.

Kong's hybrid mode

Hybrid mode separates control plane nodes, which hold the database, from data plane nodes that serve traffic and do not need one. A compromised or overloaded data plane has a smaller blast radius, and data planes can keep running on their last known configuration if the control plane is unreachable. Confirm how many control plane nodes you need, how data planes authenticate to them, and whether your team will run the control plane yourself or use Kong Konnect as the hosted control plane.

Traefik's single binary and image

Traefik ships as a single Go binary and as an official Docker image, so the runtime has no separate database and no required external store to install before it starts. Upgrades mean replacing one artifact and restarting or rolling the process, which keeps the operational surface small. Confirm which Traefik minor version your platform supports, because Traefik supports each minor version until the next one is released, and plan upgrades on that cadence.

Traefik's provider-driven routes

Traefik builds its routing table from providers that watch Docker, Swarm, Kubernetes CRD, Kubernetes Ingress, Kubernetes Gateway API, ECS, Consul, Nomad and file configuration. Routes appear and change as the orchestrator reports them, so the source of truth lives in container labels, Kubernetes objects or service registry entries rather than in a central gateway database. Check which providers your platform team will use, and who owns the labels or manifests that define each route, because a mistake in those files becomes a routing change.

Where configuration and state live

The core difference is where the authoritative configuration sits. Kong keeps it in a database, a declarative file or a control plane, while Traefik derives it from the platform it runs on and holds little durable state of its own. Before you decide, map where each route, certificate and plugin setting would be stored, who can change it, and how you would restore it after a failure. Ask for a written recovery procedure for each option you shortlist.

How each handles authentication and extension

Kong Gateway enforces authentication through plugins that you attach to services, routes or consumers. The open-source Kong/kong repository documents JWT, basic auth, OAuth and ACL authentication, so a team can validate tokens, check credentials and restrict access by consumer group without an additional product. Authentication policy lives in the gateway's configuration, which means it is versioned and reviewed the same way as the routes it protects. The open-source line stays on the 3.9 release line, so confirm that the plugin set you depend on is present in the edition you intend to run and that its support window matches your review cycle.

JWT and basic auth: Credentials and token checks run at the proxy layer, so backend services receive only requests that already passed the policy.
OAuth and ACL: The open-source README lists these options, which suit API key and group-based access patterns where consumers are known in advance.
OpenID Connect: Kong documents its OpenID Connect plugin as an Enterprise tier plugin, so federated login with an external identity provider requires Kong Gateway Enterprise, not the open-source gateway.
Admin API access: Configuration changes go through the Admin API, so restrict who can reach port 8001 and how administrative credentials are stored.

Before relying on any of these options, confirm the exact token format, claim mapping and key rotation process with Kong's current plugin documentation.

Kubernetes ingress: Traefik's route discovery against Kong's ingress controller

Traefik builds its routes from Kubernetes objects it watches, so the first decision is which provider the cluster will use. Its Kubernetes CRD provider reads Traefik's own custom resources, its Kubernetes Ingress provider reads standard Ingress objects, and its Kubernetes Gateway API provider reads Gateway API resources. Routes update as those objects change, without a process restart. Teams leaving the retired NGINX Ingress Controller have a specific path: Traefik's Kubernetes Ingress NGINX provider supports many ingress-nginx annotations, so migration can need minimal changes to existing manifests. Read the Kubernetes Ingress NGINX provider documentation and confirm that every annotation your manifests use appears on the supported list.

Kong's Kubernetes ingress controller runs on the same gateway engine described in the Kong/kong README, which also covers routing, load balancing, health checking and plugins written in Lua, Go or JavaScript. Ingress behavior is expressed through Kubernetes resources and annotations that the controller translates into gateway routes and plugins, so plugin configuration lives in the cluster alongside the manifests. The platform team should test three areas: annotation handling against its current ingress manifests, the custom resources the controller reads (including any that define plugins and consumers), and the Gateway API path, which needs its own validation against the Gateway API version the controller supports. The README does not list those details, so confirm them with Kong for the release you plan to run. If the ingress design depends on OpenID Connect, confirm the edition first, since Kong marks that plugin as Enterprise tier.

Turn these areas into a test matrix before any cutover. As an illustrative example, a staging cluster holds a copy of one production namespace with the same hostnames, TLS secrets and three representative ingress manifests, and each controller is deployed against it in turn. For every route, record status codes, header rewrites, timeouts, WebSocket and gRPC behavior, and how long a configuration change takes to appear. For TLS, Traefik supports Let's Encrypt certificates, including wildcards, so decide whether certificates come from that path, from an in-cluster certificate manager or from an internal CA, and confirm how each controller reads them. Keep the existing controller running until rollback is proven, and assign an owner to each annotation that has no equivalent on the new platform.

Capability comparison: Kong Gateway against Traefik Proxy

This table compares Kong Gateway and Traefik Proxy on the capabilities that usually decide the shortlist: licensing, routing, authentication, admin tooling, certificates, resilience features, providers and release support. Read each row against your own traffic, identity and Kubernetes setup, because a gap in the supplied facts is not proof of a gap in the product.

Capability	Kong Gateway	Traefik Proxy
License and open-source line	Open-source Kong/kong repository is Apache-2.0 and its releases stay on the 3.9 line. Newer Kong Gateway Enterprise releases are commercial.	MIT-licensed HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer. Traefik Hub and Traefik Enterprise are separate commercial products.
Core routing and load balancing	Routing, load balancing and health checking are listed in the Kong/kong README. Routes are defined through the Admin API, declarative files or Konnect.	Generates routes automatically by listening to orchestrators and service registries. Configuration updates apply without restarts.
Authentication options	JWT, basic auth, OAuth and ACL are listed in the README. OpenID Connect is an Enterprise-tier plugin, so confirm it is licensed before design.	Authentication is not covered in the supplied facts. Confirm supported middleware for your identity provider in your own environment.
Plugin model	Plugins written in Lua, Go or JavaScript. Enterprise-tier plugins require a Kong Gateway Enterprise license.	Middleware is configured through providers and routers. Confirm whether your required policies exist as built-in middleware or need custom code.
Admin interface	Kong Manager is the web interface and Admin API runs on port 8001 in the quick start. Konnect is the hosted cloud control plane.	Built-in web UI and REST API. Confirm whether the API covers every change your automation needs.
Let's Encrypt and wildcard certificates	Not covered in the supplied facts. Confirm certificate automation and wildcard support in your deployment.	Let's Encrypt certificates, including wildcards, are a documented feature.
Circuit breakers and retries	Not covered in the supplied facts. Confirm whether the needed resilience behavior is available through plugins or configuration.	Circuit breakers and retries are documented features.
WebSocket, HTTP/2 and gRPC	Not covered in the supplied facts. Test your protocol mix against the release you plan to run.	WebSocket, HTTP/2 and gRPC are documented features.
Metrics and access logs	Not covered in the supplied facts. Confirm metrics export and log formats in your environment.	Prometheus and other metrics, plus JSON or CLF access logs, are documented features.
Providers and deployment	Traditional, DB-less and hybrid self-managed topologies. Kubernetes ingress controller is included in the README.	Docker, Swarm, Kubernetes CRD, Ingress, Gateway API, ECS, Consul, Nomad and file configuration. Distributed as a single Go binary and Docker image.
Release cadence and support windows	Kong Gateway 3.9 reached end of full support on December 12, 2025. LTS releases 3.10 and 3.14 are supported until March 31, 2028 and April 7, 2029.	Usually three or four minor versions a year, each supported until the next release. Confirm the support window of your chosen version before standardizing.

What is open source and what is sold by each vendor

The open-source Kong/kong repository is licensed under Apache-2.0, and its releases stay on the 3.9 line. The most recent release in the supplied record is 3.9.4, published October 12, 2026, and 3.9.3 came before it on June 17, 2026. The open-source gateway covers routing, load balancing, health checking and the JWT, basic auth, OAuth and ACL authentication described in the repository README. The lifecycle dates matter most here, because the version support policy that sets them applies to Kong Gateway Enterprise, and Kong's version support policy is the document to read alongside the repository.

License: Apache-2.0 for the repository, so the gateway code can be read, built and modified under that license.
Release line: 3.9.x only, with 3.9.4 on October 12, 2026 and 3.9.3 on June 17, 2026.
Authentication scope: JWT, basic auth, OAuth and ACL are listed in the README, but OpenID Connect is an Enterprise-tier plugin and is not part of the open-source gateway.
Support window: the 3.9 series reached end of full support on December 12, 2025 and reaches end of sunset support on December 12, 2026. Ask Kong whether the open-source line receives security fixes after that date.
Admin tooling: the quick start exposes the Admin API on port 8001 and Kong Manager on port 8002. Confirm what Kong Manager includes in the open-source edition before you plan around it.

Get Kong's written statement on patch commitments for the open-source 3.9 line before you put it into production, because the published support dates are tied to the Enterprise policy.

What drives the running cost of each platform

Running cost for Kong and Traefik comes from who operates the gateway, what state it depends on, which skills the team must hold, and which commercial tier it buys. The cards below separate the one-time work from the recurring spend so you can ask each vendor for a quote that matches your environment.

Infrastructure footprint

Kong in traditional or hybrid mode adds a PostgreSQL database, its backups, and the nodes that connect to it, while Traefik runs as a single Go binary or official Docker image. Both can run in the same cluster, so the difference is mostly the stateful tier you must patch, monitor and fail over. Ask each side for its recommended node count and sizing for your peak request rate, and for the storage and backup components it assumes.

Database or no database

Kong's traditional mode stores configuration in a shared database, while DB-less mode holds it in memory and hybrid mode keeps the database on control plane nodes only. Traefik reads its routes from orchestrators and file configuration, so it has no database to size or back up. Recurring cost for Kong therefore includes database operations, and the choice of topology also decides which plugins and failover patterns you can use.

Lua and Kubernetes CRD skills

Kong plugins can be written in Lua, Go or JavaScript, so a team extending the gateway needs people who can build, test and maintain that code through every upgrade. Traefik configuration is mostly declarative through Kubernetes CRDs, Ingress or the Gateway API, which shifts the skill need toward cluster and manifest management. Staff time is usually the largest recurring line, so ask who will write and own custom plugins and who will review route changes.

Support contract and commercial tiers

Both open-source lines are free to download, but commercial support, the enterprise gateway and the Traefik tiers are paid subscriptions. Kong's Enterprise tier includes plugins such as OpenID Connect, and Traefik sells Hub for API management and Enterprise as an API gateway. Your recurring fee depends on which tier covers the features you need, so ask each vendor to price the exact feature list, node count and support hours in writing.

Upgrade cadence and support windows

Kong's Enterprise releases follow LTS windows, with 3.10 and 3.14 supported until March 31, 2028 and April 7, 2029, while the open-source 3.9 line reached end of full support on December 12, 2025. Traefik usually ships three or four minor versions a year and supports each until the next one arrives, which means more frequent but smaller upgrades. Budget the testing and change windows for the cadence you will actually follow, and confirm the support window in the contract.

One-time versus recurring work

Initial design, plugin or route migration, and hardening are one-time effort, often fixed-scope and agreed in writing before work starts. Upgrades, monitoring, certificate management, on-call response and any retainer are recurring. Ask each quote to separate these two columns, name who performs each task, and state what happens to the gateway if the retainer ends.

Moving from Kong to Traefik, or Traefik to Kong, without an outage

This sequence moves traffic from one gateway to the other in stages, so each route is proven on the new path before the old one is switched off. Most of the effort sits in plugins, consumers and automation, which do not carry over as-is.

Inventory routes, plugins and consumers
The platform team exports the current state from the source gateway: services, routes, upstreams, plugins with their scopes, consumers and credential types, and any certificates in use. For Kong, this usually means reading the Admin API or the declarative configuration file for the topology in use. For Traefik, it means collecting the router rules, middlewares, providers and TLS configuration from file or Kubernetes resources. The step is done when every route has a named owner and every plugin or middleware has a row in a mapping sheet that says what it does and whether it is needed after cutover. Confirm the export format with the vendor documentation for your version before you rely on it.
Map plugin behavior to middleware
Each Kong plugin is compared with the Traefik middleware, or with an external component, that produces the same behavior. Rate limiting, header transforms, retries, circuit breaking and CORS are usually matched directly, while Kong plugins without a close Traefik counterpart need a documented replacement, a custom plugin, or a decision to drop the feature. Teams moving from Traefik to Kong follow the same logic in reverse. Mark any behavior that depends on the exact order of execution, since middleware and plugin chains can differ in ordering. The output is a signed-off mapping document that the security team reviews, and every gap is either closed or accepted in writing.
Rebuild authentication and consumer credentials
Authentication is the step most likely to break clients, so it gets its own pass. Consumer credentials such as API keys, basic auth or JWT signing material are not portable in a way that lets clients keep working by default, so the team decides whether each credential is migrated, reissued or replaced by a token from the identity provider. Forward authentication or OIDC behavior is rebuilt on the target side and tested with real client flows. Confirm which authentication plugins are included in the edition you run, because some are Enterprise-tier in Kong. The step is done when each client type has a test that passes against the new gateway using its production credential path.
Transfer certificates and express routes as declarations
Certificates and route definitions are the parts that move most cleanly. TLS certificates can be exported and loaded into the new gateway, and Traefik can obtain Let's Encrypt certificates, including wildcards, once the ACME configuration is set. Routes are rewritten as declarations: Traefik router rules, or Kong services and routes, generated from the inventory rather than typed by hand. Store these in version control so the same definitions are reviewed and deployed the same way. The step is done when the new gateway serves every hostname with a valid certificate chain in a staging environment, and a diff between old and new route tables shows no unexplained differences.
Run both gateways in parallel
The new gateway runs alongside the old one with the same backends, and a share of traffic or a set of non-critical hostnames is sent to it. Metrics, access logs and error rates are compared side by side, including latency and status codes for each route. Teams should set their own acceptance thresholds before the test begins rather than adjusting them after results arrive. Operators also confirm that the observability pipeline records the same fields on both paths, since Traefik exposes Prometheus and JSON or CLF access logs, and Kong's logging depends on the plugins enabled. The step is done when the agreed thresholds hold over the test window and every discrepancy has a recorded cause.
Shift DNS or the ingress class
Cutover happens at one of two points: the DNS record for each hostname, or the ingress class that a Kubernetes cluster uses to choose a controller. Lowering DNS time-to-live ahead of the change makes rollback faster, and the team should confirm how their resolver and clients cache records. For ingress, the change is made per namespace or per resource so that one application moves at a time. Traefik's Kubernetes Ingress NGINX provider can help teams that are coming from ingress-nginx annotations, but each annotation should still be tested. The step is done when traffic for each migrated hostname reaches the new gateway, and the rollback procedure has been rehearsed once.
Retire the old path and automate what remains
After a stable period, the old gateway is removed from the traffic path, and its configuration and credentials are archived according to the team's retention policy. Admin API scripts, CI/CD jobs and dashboards that called the old gateway are rewritten against the new one, because those automations do not transfer on their own. Secrets for the old gateway are revoked, and the database or data plane resources it used are decommissioned if they are no longer needed. The step is done when no client, script or monitor still references the old endpoints, and the migration record, including the mapping document and the accepted gaps, is filed with the change owner.

What implementing each platform involves and where projects run long

A Kong deployment starts with a topology decision that shapes most of the later work. Kong Gateway documents traditional mode, where every node connects to a database, DB-less mode, where configuration is held in memory, and hybrid mode, where control plane nodes sit on the database and data planes do not. Traditional mode puts PostgreSQL operations, backups and failover on your team's runbook. DB-less and hybrid modes move that work elsewhere but change how configuration is deployed and reviewed. Plan for plugin design, identity integration (JWT, OAuth, ACL and, on Enterprise, OpenID Connect) and a decision on whether Konnect or Kong Manager will be the operating console. Each of these choices should be written down before the first node is built, because changing topology later means reworking deployment pipelines.

A Traefik deployment shifts the effort toward provider configuration and Kubernetes RBAC. Routes are generated from providers such as Kubernetes CRD, Kubernetes Ingress, the Kubernetes Gateway API or file configuration, so the review question is who may create or change those objects in each namespace. Middleware standards need an owner, since retries, circuit breakers and header rules are defined as configuration that teams can copy inconsistently. Certificate storage is the other focus: Let's Encrypt issuance, including wildcards, depends on DNS validation working from the cluster, and the certificate store must be backed up and access-controlled. Confirm how your team will provision these certificates and who holds the DNS credentials before go-live.

Projects run long for three reasons. The first is undocumented plugin dependencies in Kong: a Lua, Go or JavaScript plugin may assume a database table, a shared cache or a particular ordering with other plugins, and those assumptions surface only under load or during an upgrade. Inventory every plugin and its dependencies before migration. The second is certificate and DNS validation, which fails quietly when DNS providers, challenge paths or rate limits are not tested in the target environment. The third is migrating annotation-driven ingress. Traefik's Kubernetes Ingress NGINX provider supports many ingress-nginx annotations, but every annotation must be checked against the Traefik documentation rather than assumed equivalent. DeployOpen scopes this work as fixed-scope engagements agreed in writing before work starts, so the inventory, test plan and cutover steps belong in that written scope.

Questions teams ask before choosing Kong or Traefik

Which is cheaper to run, Kong or Traefik?

Traefik's open-source binary is MIT-licensed and Kong's open-source line is Apache-2.0, so the software license alone does not decide cost. The run cost depends on what you need from each. Traefik is distributed as a single Go binary and an official Docker image, which keeps the footprint small. Kong needs a database in traditional mode, or a control plane and data planes in hybrid mode, and its Enterprise plugins and support sit behind a commercial license. Ask each vendor for the licensed tier that covers your required plugins, support window and hosting model, then add the engineering hours to operate the database and upgrades. Both costs recur, and the commercial line item usually dominates.

How long does an implementation take, and what does it depend on?

The timeline depends on the number of routes, the authentication model, the number of environments and how much policy has to be migrated, not on the product name alone. A Traefik ingress setup that uses Kubernetes Ingress or Gateway API resources is typically smaller in scope than a Kong deployment with custom plugins, a database and a hybrid control plane. Traefik can also move from ingress-nginx annotations with minimal configuration changes, according to Traefik's documentation, which shortens migrations from that controller. DeployOpen scopes implementations in writing before work starts, so ask for a fixed scope that lists routes, plugins, identity integration, environments and acceptance tests.

Can our team run Kong or Traefik without outside help?

A team with Kubernetes or Docker experience can often run Traefik for routing and TLS, but the answer depends on your in-house skills, not on the product. Traefik's Let's Encrypt support, including wildcard certificates, and its providers for Kubernetes, Docker and file configuration make a small platform team self-sufficient for common cases. Kong adds a database or hybrid topology, plugin configuration through the Admin API and, for Enterprise features, a commercial relationship. If your team lacks experience with those components, a fixed-scope engagement from DeployOpen can plan, implement, harden and document the platform, and a retainer can cover upgrades and support afterward.

Can Traefik replace Kong's plugins?

Only partly. Traefik covers routing, load balancing, retries, circuit breakers, WebSocket, HTTP/2, gRPC, metrics and access logs, and it is configured by its providers rather than a plugin catalog. Kong's README describes JWT, basic auth, OAuth and ACL authentication, plus plugins written in Lua, Go or JavaScript and LLM and MCP gateway features. Before choosing Traefik as a replacement, list each Kong plugin you rely on and map it to a Traefik middleware or an external component. Any gap needs a custom build, a different product or a documented exception, and that work belongs in the written scope.

Does OIDC require a Kong Enterprise license?

Yes, according to Kong's plugin documentation, the OpenID Connect plugin is an Enterprise tier plugin and is not part of the open-source gateway. Confirm the current edition and entitlement with Kong before you design around it, because plugin tiers can change between releases. If you need OIDC on Traefik, check Traefik's current documentation and its commercial offerings, since the supplied facts do not establish which Traefik tier covers that capability. Either way, identity integration should be tested end to end with your identity provider before you commit.

How does Kong's 3.9 support window affect our plan?

Kong's open-source repository stays on the 3.9 line, with 3.9.4 released on October 12, 2026. Kong Gateway 3.9 reached end of full support on December 12, 2025 and reaches end of sunset support on December 12, 2026, according to Kong's version support policy, which applies to Kong Gateway Enterprise. Kong's latest Enterprise version is 3.16, and 3.10 and 3.14 are LTS releases supported until March 31, 2028 and April 7, 2029. Plan your upgrade path and confirm the open-source support expectations for your edition with Kong before go-live, because a platform on an unsupported line creates security and compliance risk.

What does a consultant need from us before quoting?

A consultant needs enough detail to write a fixed scope, so bring your traffic patterns, route inventory, authentication requirements, Kubernetes or VM hosting model, existing gateway or ingress policies, certificate and DNS arrangements, logging and monitoring targets, and your compliance obligations. Also name the environments, the acceptance tests and the support model you expect after go-live. DeployOpen does not publish a price list, so a quote follows from that written scope. Ask any proposal to separate one-time implementation work from recurring retainers and to list licensing you must buy from the vendor.

How DeployOpen helps you choose, implement or migrate

DeployOpen plans, implements, integrates, hardens, documents and supports self-hosted open-source platforms inside your own cloud accounts, data centers or air-gapped networks. For Kong vs Traefik, we start with the gateway and ingress decision your team actually faces, then build and hand over only the part you choose.

How we scope

Confirm which traffic goes through the gateway: north-south API calls, Kubernetes ingress, or both
Inventory the authentication methods and plugins each service needs before choosing a platform
Agree the scope, deliverables and timeline in writing before any build work starts

How we build

Deploy the chosen topology, such as Kong's traditional, DB-less or hybrid modes, or Traefik with its chosen providers
Configure routing, TLS certificates, authentication and rate limits against your own services
Run security testing on the gateway and the routes it exposes before go-live

How we hand over

Document configuration, routing rules, upgrade steps and the version lines you are running
Deliver runbooks for certificate renewal, backups and the Admin API or Traefik API access controls
Walk your platform and security teams through operations so the handover is tested, not assumed

How we support

Offer ongoing support, upgrades and continuous testing as a retainer after handover
Track the version support windows you depend on and plan upgrades before they reach end of support
Re-test the gateway after plugin, provider or topology changes so exposure stays known

Kong vs Traefik