Solution:
a.
For example, (1,2,4,5) and (9,2,12,6) work.
b.
Before solving the problem, we establish a useful definition and lemma.
If p is a prime and x is a nonzero rational number, we define ordpx to be the unique integer k such that p−kx is an integer not divisible by p. For example, ord345=2 and ord5511=−1. Then we claim the following:
Lemma. Let p be prime and let x,y be nonzero rational numbers. Then:
(i) ordp(xy)=ordpx+ordpy.
(ii) ordp(x/y)=ordpx−ordpy.
(iii) If ordpx<ordpy, then ordp(x+y)=ordpx.
Proof of the lemma. Parts (i)-(ii) are straightforward. For part (iii), let k=ordpx and k+ℓ=ordpy, where we assume ℓ>0. Then p−kx=n and p−k−ℓy=m for some integers m,n not divisible by p. It follows that p−k(x+y)=n+pℓm, and this is an integer not divisible by p. Thus ordp(x+y)=k as claimed, proving the lemma.
Now we turn to the problem.
Suppose a,b,c are integers such that a/b+b/c+c/a is an integer. We will show that ordp(abc) is a multiple of 3 for all primes p, which implies that abc is a perfect cube.
Let p be a prime and let r=ordpa, s=ordpb, t=ordpc. By part (i) of the lemma, ordp(abc)=r+s+t.
By part (ii) of the lemma, we have ordp(a/b)=r−s, ordp(b/c)=s−t, and ordp(c/a)=t−r. If these three differences are 0, then r=s=t and r+s+t is trivially a multiple of 3. Otherwise, the least of r−s,s−t,t−r is negative and the greatest is positive (since their sum is 0).
We now claim that at least two of r−s,s−t,t−r must be tied for least. If this is not true, then, by applying part (iii) of the lemma, we may conclude that ordp(a/b+b/c+c/a)=min{r−s,s−t,t−r}<0, which contradicts the assumption that a/b+b/c+c/a is an integer. Thus we have proven our claim. But if two of r−s,s−t,t−r are equal, then r,s,t (in some order) form an arithmetic progression, and r+s+t is three times the middle term of the progression. Thus we have shown that r+s+t is a multiple of 3; in other words, ordp(abc) is a multiple of 3 for all primes p, and we are finished.