Don't fail sRD(offer) over rid mismatch, just answer with unicast. - #2794

@dontcallmedom This PR removes an earlier amendment, but I seem to be tripping over something. Is there a correct way to do this?

the narrow technical issue reported in the console is

The container with id process-to-apply-description marked as amended cannot embed the other container of amendment apply-description-restrictions

But if my reading is correct, the real source of the problem is that this pull request reverts #2757 and the part of #2758 that was under the id remote-rid-reneg - if so, I think the correct way to describe this in amendments.json would be simply to remove altogether the current entry under id remote-rid-reneg (since it's no longer a change to the text of the current Rec).

Scheduled for November interim.

From November meeting minutes: Harald: I think this works