It is always a good idea to look at the local question first. What is the maximal pro-$p$ extension of $\mathbf{Q}_p$ ? There is a vast literature on the subject, starting with Demushkin whose results are exposed in an old Bourbaki talk by Serre on the *Structure de certains pro-p-groupes (d'après Demuškin),* (http://www.numdam.org/item?id=SB_1962-1964__8__145_0). They turn out to be extremely interesting groups which satisfy a kind "Poincaré duality" and have a striking presentation mysteriously similar to the presentation of the fundamental group of a compact orientable surface. Now I have to go for my yoga class; I hope you can find more on the web by yourself.

**Addendum.** Another good idea which I record here although I'm sure you don't need to be reminded of it is that in the local situation one should first ask what happens at primes $l\neq p$. What is the maximal pro-$l$ extension of $\mathbf{Q}_p$ ? This is much easier to answer because the only possible ramification is tame. You have the maximal unramified $l$-extension, which is a $\mathbf{Z}_l$-extension, and then a totally ramified extension of group $\mathbf{Z}_l(1)$, the projective limit of the roots of $1$ of $l$-power order. As a pro-$l$ group it admits the presentation

$\langle\tau,\sigma\mid\sigma\tau\sigma^{-1}=\tau^p\rangle$.

All this can be found in Chapter 16 of Hasse's *Zahlentherie* and in a paper by Albert in the *Annals* in the late 30s.

**Addendum 2.** A third good idea is to look at the function field analogues, wherein you replace $\mathbf{Q}$ by a function field $k(X)$ over a finite field $k$ of characterisitc $p$, where $X$ is a smooth projective absolutely irreducible curve over $k$. There would again be two cases, according as you are looking at the maximal pro-$l$ extension for a prime $l\neq p$ or for the prime $l=p$; the former should be much easier. You can simplify the problem by replacing $k$ by an algebraic closure. We are then in the setting of Abhyankar's conjecture (1957) which was very useful to Grothendieck as a first test for his theory of schemes. In any case, the conjecture was settled by Raynaud and Harbatter in the early 90s.

5more comments