API Management (gateways, portals, service mesh, proxies)

Where this market publishes its structure

• Kong Plugin Hub (github.com/Kong/developer.konghq.com app/_kong_plugins @fd18272bdb) machine-readable, 142 plugins (113 Kong-built, 29 by 19 publishers); 11 publishers linked, 2 end users held, 6 not in catalog
• Kubernetes Gateway API conformance reports (github.com/kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api @aabc423cb8) machine-readable, 269 reports, 33 implementations, v1.6 newest; 15 providers linked (current window v1.4+)
• Istio ecosystem (github.com/istio/istio.io data/companies.yml @a03df1cfd4) machine-readable, 34 providers, 12 pro services, 35 integrations, 81 users; 11 providers linked (providers + pro services only)
• OpenAPI Initiative members (api-gw.platform.linuxfoundation.org project-service public members) machine-readable, 170 records, 32 current; 8 linked; 10 academic/public held; 4 out-of-market held
• Linkerd ADOPTERS.md (linkerd/linkerd2 @b60b8e7478) machine-readable, ~101 rows, all END USERS: held, none linked
• Envoy adopters not machine-readable: envoyproxy/envoy has no ADOPTERS file (checked 2026-10-18)
• CNCF landscape API Gateway / Service Mesh categories machine-readable, already read by cloud-native (sweep-cloud-native.py); edges reused, not rewritten
• Tyk partners (tyk.io/partners) not machine-readable: logos only, no outbound partner links or identities
• Gravitee partners and plugins (gravitee.io/partners, /plugins) not machine-readable: no outbound partner domains; plugins are Gravitee-built
• Apigee integrations (cloud.google.com/apigee) not machine-readable: Google-built connectors; no partner register
• Azure API Management not machine-readable: no partner or plugin register published
• APIs.json participants not machine-readable: no member or participant register exists
• openapis.org/membership members page not machine-readable: 404 (2026-10-18); the LF project-service endpoint is read instead

Own = declares at least one integration itself; covered = visible only because an aggregator, standards body, regulator or partner contract names it; distribution-only = listed only on cloud marketplaces it sells through, a channel reported beside, never counted as its own declared integrations; undeclared = nothing we can read, so no number; declares_compatibility = providers with a `compatible` shape vote, report only (kin, 2026-10-13): never counted as own, never in depth or position.

Taxonomy how this market maps onto apis.io

Derived 2026-10-18 from the 70 providers in this market we could resolve in the catalog. The percentage is the share of those providers carrying each one; it describes the market, not the tag or industry. Tag groups have no page of their own yet, so they are listed unlinked.

share of resolved cohort carrying it; tags >=0.20 & >=3 members (max 12, junk dropped), tag_groups >=0.20 (cooccurrence, non-cross-cutting; max 8), industries >=0.20 (max 6), areas >=0.10 (max 6; areas are keyword-matched and sparse), capabilities L1 >=0.20 (max 8); derive-market-taxonomy.py

Leaders by position (provisional)

Provisional: grouped by position, depth compared within a position only. Distribution (cloud marketplaces) and iPaaS bridges are counted beside position, never inside it. Unknown-builder listings are left out of position shares and counted here.

gravity 1 · other companies invest to build on it

builds-on 13 · publishes apps on other platforms' stores

standard 28 · listed by a voluntary standard's own directory

mixed 3 · no single mode dominates

distribution 1 · only sells through cloud marketplaces

undeclared 24 · declares nothing we can read: no number