I have a legacy service that I am trying to implement calls from within soapUI. I have run fiddler while the application that generates the requests runs and have captured all of the information about the requests. I am attempting to use a REST construct within soapUI as this isn't a soap service. I'm assuming this should work.
Here is the basic structure of the request, i've removed servernames for security purposes and xx 'd out the authorization string for the most part.
POST https://www.testserver.com/Export/RequestXML.aspx HTTP/1.1
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR 3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0; InfoPath.3; .NET4.0C; .NET4.0E)
Authorization: Negotiate TlRMTVxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx=
<XML><STATUS><PARAMETERS companyid= "xx" getlookup="xxxxxxxx"/></STATUS></XML>
When I try to implement this in soapUI using NTLM it generates 'NTLM' rather than 'Negotiate' for the authorization header. This seems to be the only part of the request that isn't matching what I see in fiddler. Passing the exact authorization string as part of the header that is seen in fiddler also does not work.
Any tips for implementing negotiated NTLM requests?
I am using the latest version (1.6 now I believe). I wanted to report back that I was able to get this working. For some reason this started working w/o any apparent changes to the project. Even in examining the raw request at the time it appeared to be sending the same exact request pre and post this actually working. I did notice after upgrading to the latest version of ReadyAPI that there appear to be improvements in the authorization manager which helps me in moving these tests from environment to environment although I don't believe that was the root cause of my issue. Thanks for the ideas, I appreciate it!