The document is consistent and ready for publication. 
Just as a style comment: section 1.4 is a bit unusual in an RFC, specifically by mentioning what happened during one IETF meeting, etc. Nothing wrong with it but it mixes a specification (the RFC resulting for publication) with historic actions. Maybe there is a way to avoid this by changing a bit the text of the 1.4 section.

Another comment: again all fine! but when a document like this updates/fixes other documents, including errata, new text replacing sections in other documents, etc, the implementer has a challenging task in putting the pieces together. I'd for the future suggest not to use this "amendment" technique, but to publish complete updated RFCs versions instead.