The main objection seemed to be the confusing example about
notifications, which seems to have little relevance to OPES protocol
issues. The example calls for a note to be sent from a child ISP to a
parent company when a user reconfigures his preferences in such a way
as to subvert a policy of the parent company. OPES is only indirectly
involved, if at all. Is there a better example?
I'm not sure if the IESG comments about "one-party consent" are an
objection or not. The architecture is clearly in compliance with
the IAB recommendation, and perhaps that could be stressed more.
The last paragraph of the one-party consent section is a little
confusing. It calls copying an "adaptation" that cannot be detected.
I think that the issue is more simply described as content privacy.