Suppose $D$ is an $\infty$-category, then we have the equivalence
$$ \text{Fib} (D) \substack{ \text{St} \\ \longrightarrow \\ \cong \\ \longleftarrow \\ \text{Un}} [ D^\text{op}, \mathbf{Kan}]$$
between (right) fibrations over $D$ and functors from the opposite of $D$ to Kan complexes ($\infty$-groupoids) via the Grothendieck construction.


Given a map $f: C \to D$ of $\infty$-categories, there is a functor $f^\* : \text{Fib} (D) \to \text{Fib}(C)$ by forming pullbacks. Since $f$ induces a functor $C^\text{opp} \to D^\text{opp}$, there is also a functor $f^\* : [ D^\text{op}, \mathbf{Kan}] \to [ C^\text{op}, \mathbf{Kan}]$. 


Question: For a fibration $\pi : X \to D$ do we have
$$ \text{St} f^\* \pi \cong f^\* \text{St} \pi \quad ?$$
So is the Grothendieck construction compatible with pullbacks?


Thanks for any hints.



Compatibility of Grothendieck construction with pullback
Yes, though it is usually written as the commutativity of *un*straightening with pullback (on the $\infty$-categorical level it doesn't matter, since straightening and unstraightening are inverse equivalences). This compatibility even holds on the point-set level if one uses a suitable model categorical presentation of the straightening-unstraightening equivalence, see Proposition 2.2.1.1 of *higher topos theory* (if you combine (1) and (2) of that proposition then you get the compatibility of straightening with left Kan extensions. The compatibility of unstraightening and pullbacks is obtained by switching to right adjoints).


