The warning is an indication that the test lab should check the results manually, I see no problem with reporting a warning if the limit is above what the tool can check. The limit listed in the server was not checked is what the warning indicates.

Need to figure out a better way to do this (split test cases), but also look at different report - since not really a skip, but more a not testable or something

After discussion

• we have Not Implemented for tests where scripts do not exist
• we need a Not Applicable - for test where they do not apply to the application (we do not have this state)
• we use Skip for tests where the tool can not handle a test (or the device needs a different configuration or does not provide mechanism needed to automate the test) - these are tests where the lab need to look and run the test in a manual manner. The key point is that a skipped test need to be review and in most cases could be run manually

[make sure the result interpretation section includes all of this information]

Review all warning, skip and not implemented test to ensure they follow these rules