We check that this is a solution:
2∣126=53+1,5∣10=32+1,3∣33=25+1.
Now let p,q,r be three primes satisfying the given divisibility relations. Since q does not divide qr+1, p=q, and similarly q=r,r=p, so p,q and r are all distinct. We now prove a lemma.
Lemma. Let p,q,r be distinct primes with p∣qr+1, and p>2. Then either 2r∣p−1 or p∣q2−1.
*Proof.* Since p∣qr+1, we have
qr≡−1≡1(modp),because p>2,
but
q2r≡(−1)2≡1(modp).
Let d be the order of q(modp); then from the above congruences, d divides 2r but not r. Since r is prime, the only possibilities are d=2 or d=2r. If d=2r, then 2r∣p−1 because d∣p−1. If d=2, then q2≡1(modp) so p∣q2−1. This proves the lemma. ■
Now let's first consider the case where p,q and r are all odd. Since p∣qr+1, by the lemma either 2r∣p−1 or p∣q2−1. But 2r∣p−1 is impossible because
2r∣p−1⟹p≡1(modr)⟹0≡pq+1≡2(modr)
and r>2. So we must have p∣q2−1=(q−1)(q+1). Since p is an odd prime and q−1,q+1 are both even, we must have
p∣2q−1orp∣2q+1;
either way,
p≤2q+1<q.
But then by a similar argument we may conclude q<r,r<p, a contradiction.
Thus, at least one of p,q,r must equal 2. By a cyclic permutation we may assume that p=2. Now r∣2q+1, so by the lemma, either 2q∣r−1 or r∣22−1. But 2q∣r−1 is impossible as before, because q divides r2+1=(r2−1)+2 and q>2. Hence, we must have r∣22−1. We conclude that r=3, and q∣r2+1=10. Because q=p, we must have q=5. Hence (2, 5, 3) and its cyclic permutations are the only solutions.