Hi Alex, The solution to your dilemma hinges on the definition of a stub period. A stub exists only in relation to a following/preceding schedule of (one or more) regular periods. The swap described above comprises a single, irregular period – firstRegularPeriodStartDate makes no sense in the context as there are no subsequent regular periods. In this case, it is appopriate to specify the calculationPeriod-, payment- and (where relevant) reset- frequencies as “1T”, similar to the convention for single period OIS swaps. In answer to your final questions: (1) No, IRD-16 is not applicable here; (2) Yes, it is correct to omit firstRegularPeriodStartDate, because there are no subsequent regular periods; (3) No, this would be inconsistent and a mis-representation; (4) Yes, we should specify calculationPeriodFrequency – and other relevant frequencies – as 1T. Best regards, Harry McAllister Chair, IRD-WG