I restarted my firewall from scratch and it sorted itself out.

Most strange.

After having tried this on my production hardware also I have unfortunately concluded that is isn't limited to virtualized instances of pfSense. My now live physical firewall does the same thing (ntp service crashes) when having it's ntp server peers on two different interfaces (WAN and LAN). :'(

Only using external ntp servers on the WAN interface have been stable for a few days now so that is the workaround I 'll have to settle with until the bug is resolved. Only connecting to the internal ntp server on the LAN interface is not an option for me for redundancy reasons, so I haven't tried that but my guess is that it would also work.

Maybe it isn't very common to have ntp server peers on multiple interfaces and maybe that is the reason this haven't been discovered in beta testing?

There is a possible gotcha when setting up your DSL modem as a bridge - you usually need to release your public IP address BEFORE configuring your modem to bridge mode.

Here's a good article on how to do what you are wanting to do: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=579876

made sure the IP is not in use somewhere else?

No outbound firewall blocks?

After some testing it seems the LCDProc package is causing this for me.

When I do a webgui reset the display goes to a screen that shows Cli: 0  Scr: 0 with no backlight. I didn't notice it till days after my initial webgui reset. Once I restarted the LCD package the memory leak started again. Reset tonight and Im going to leave the package in the inop state for a few weeks.

Running the dev package.

Sorry, I should have said I'm using the NAT method.

Restarting the modem has fixed it, so I'm hoping it'll work from now on.

Other than that, it was really easy to get this modem running with pfSense  :)

I was able to solve this by removing /var/db/pkg/perl-5.12.4 and then running the install again if anyone encounters this in the future.

The added NIC is a Intel  EXPI9301CTBLK.

let's put it this way.

If you remove all the copyrights, you violate the license.

If you build a binary and call it pfSense, you violate our trademark.

Otherwise, yeah, perhaps you need an attorney.

The FiOS router currently handles NAT, but I am pretty unhappy with it's performance overall. It's prone to crashing and needed hard restarts, its throughput seems pretty poor, and the user interface is a pain. Hence my idea to essentially bridge it so that the pfSense box servers as the DHCP server and is the "first line of defense."