THe problem with Ravenna seems to lie in paragraph 44:
"44. In the history of the East and of the West, at least until the ninth century, a series of prerogatives was recognised, always in the context of conciliarity, according to the conditions of the times, for the protos or kephale at each of the established ecclesiastical levels: locally, for the bishop as protos of his diocese with regard to his presbyters and people; regionally, for the protos of each metropolis with regard to the bishops of his province, and for the protos of each of the five patriarchates, with regard to the metropolitans of each circumscription; and universally, for the bishop of Rome as protos among the patriarchs. This distinction of levels does not diminish the sacramental equality of every bishop or the catholicity of each local Church."
In shorthand, it says that the relationship between a diocesan and his presbyters is akin to the relationship between a metropolitan and his bishops, that of a patriarch and his metropolitans, and finally that of the bishop of Rome and the other patriarchs.
Since the paragraph closes affirming the standard sacramental equality of every bishop, it is clear that the previous sets are about administrative relationships. In the Orthodox Church, there is a vast difference between the relationship of a diocesan and his presbyters and the relationship amongst bishops. Ergo, this paragraph seems to say that while each bishop is equal, some are more equal than others.