Update patch set 2

Patch Set 2: I would prefer that you didn't merge this

(4 inline comments)

More clarifications on API implementation of this specification are required for me.

Patch-set: 2
Label: Code-Review=-1
Label: Workflow=0

163edccabb9a18511748f6de3cde87a4e7d25fef

@@ -1,5 +1,22 @@
 {
   "comments": [
+    {
+      "key": {
+        "uuid": "AAAAXH//vlI\u003d",
+        "filename": "specs/ipv6-provider-nets-slaac.rst",
+        "patchSetId": 2
+      },
+      "lineNbr": 3,
+      "author": {
+        "id": 261
+      },
+      "writtenOn": "2014-04-17T21:39:26Z",
+      "side": 1,
+      "message": "This blueprint has a dependency - the API attributes for IPv6 should be unhidden.",
+      "revId": "163edccabb9a18511748f6de3cde87a4e7d25fef",
+      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543",
+      "unresolved": false
+    },
     {
       "key": {
         "uuid": "AAAAXH//3Hk\u003d",
@@ -34,6 +51,24 @@
       "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543",
       "unresolved": false
     },
+    {
+      "key": {
+        "uuid": "AAAAXH//uew\u003d",
+        "filename": "specs/ipv6-provider-nets-slaac.rst",
+        "patchSetId": 2
+      },
+      "lineNbr": 33,
+      "author": {
+        "id": 261
+      },
+      "writtenOn": "2014-04-17T21:39:26Z",
+      "side": 1,
+      "message": "beyond the whitespace (for which I would not enforce a fix in specs even if it displays the ugly red box!) I think that there is something else about the implementation that need to be considered.\n\nIt seems that the requirement is that it should be possible to have provider networks which implicitly use SLAAC.\nIn this case ipv6_address_mode will be set to slaac no matter what the user specifies. Also, it might be worth considering (and documenting) the ability of returning a 409 if either ipv6 attributes are set on SLAAC networks.\n\nOn the other hand, if the user can choose an alternative address mode even on a SLAAC provider network, then this approach might be fine.",
+      "parentUuid": "AAAAXH//3II\u003d",
+      "revId": "163edccabb9a18511748f6de3cde87a4e7d25fef",
+      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543",
+      "unresolved": false
+    },
     {
       "key": {
         "uuid": "AAAAXH//288\u003d",
@@ -68,6 +103,41 @@
       "revId": "163edccabb9a18511748f6de3cde87a4e7d25fef",
       "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543",
       "unresolved": false
+    },
+    {
+      "key": {
+        "uuid": "AAAAXH//vqY\u003d",
+        "filename": "specs/ipv6-provider-nets-slaac.rst",
+        "patchSetId": 2
+      },
+      "lineNbr": 36,
+      "author": {
+        "id": 261
+      },
+      "writtenOn": "2014-04-17T21:39:26Z",
+      "side": 1,
+      "message": "Honestly, I don\u0027t think this is an error, unless the result of sphinx build is unreadable.",
+      "parentUuid": "AAAAXH//25k\u003d",
+      "revId": "163edccabb9a18511748f6de3cde87a4e7d25fef",
+      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543",
+      "unresolved": false
+    },
+    {
+      "key": {
+        "uuid": "AAAAXH//vqE\u003d",
+        "filename": "specs/ipv6-provider-nets-slaac.rst",
+        "patchSetId": 2
+      },
+      "lineNbr": 52,
+      "author": {
+        "id": 261
+      },
+      "writtenOn": "2014-04-17T21:39:26Z",
+      "side": 1,
+      "message": "what would be your strategy for this?",
+      "revId": "163edccabb9a18511748f6de3cde87a4e7d25fef",
+      "serverId": "4a232e18-c5a9-48ee-94c0-e04e7cca6543",
+      "unresolved": false
     }
   ]
 }