Yes. That is pretty much the only kind of deal that gets talked about.

The discussion is always about cutting or freezing. Sometimes it's about slowing growth, then freezing then cutting.

The "inequality" of the deal will allow developing countries to get a little closer to developed country per capita emissions, but overall proportions are supposed to remain prety much fixed. So, if China currently emits 4.5 X US per capita, that may become 3 X at some point. It will never be 1=1.

The reason for this is pragmatic. Demanding the developed countries cut till they reach China levels while China continues to grow emissions will take too long.

{edit} I forgot to mention the other non pragmatic approach that some see as fair. Developing countries should be allowed to continue emitting carbon until their historical effect on atmospheric carbon equals that of the west. This solution locks in catastrophe at some point. (I fee like I need to qualify these sentences with "If the assumptions about climate change are close to correct")